NUdiehard

Husker Hoops practice officially starts in 3 weeks. So we may as well start some completely speculative and most likely incorrect projections for players and their expected performance in the 2022-23 season. Rather that simply ranking players, let's compare how much "impact" certain players may have this season. Everyone is free to define "impact" in their own way, but the general idea of "impact" is how much that player will contribute to giving Nebraska the best chance to win IMO. So, who do you think will have the most impact this season: Griesel or Walker Wilcher or Bando Gary or Wilhelm Lloyd or Keita Keisei or Lawrence Dawson or Oleg Sam Hoiberg or Cale Jacobson Feel free to share your rationale for any of your picks

PG depth is now woefully thin. I know some think Lloyd can play some PG, but I just don't see it, especially not as a freshman. Who is next in line? Have to wonder if Keisei will get some run at PG. If not him, we may be looking at Sam Hoiberg or Cale Jacobsen getting some meaningful playing time this season.

Curious what everyone thinks on this. Hypothetically, if Johnson were to commit, and if he was cleared to play this year (health and academics, etc), and if he proves to actually be healthy and able to play, how much would that change everyone's outlook for this season? Would this actually get some of you excited about this season? How much would this increase your projections for this team? top 10 in conference? Top 7? I realize this is all a bunch of "ifs" that most likely won't happen, just curious on how much you think one really quality player could change the trajectory for this team.

One possible bonus with this hire. If Ziegler has been unemployed since March, then he essentially was not subject to any recruiting restrictions. A lot of times these assistant coaches use the time off to really develop relationships with potential future recruits and their families without any restrictions. Or maybe he just went to the the Bahamas for five months. Ha!

Well, there's also this one . . . https://saturdaytradition.com/big-ten-football/way-too-early-2022-23-big-ten-basketball-power-rankings/ 14. Nebraska (10-22, 4-16) What I like: I liked the fight the Huskers showed the last couple weeks of last season. Nebraska unexpectedly finished with 3 straight wins before falling to Northwestern by 2 at the Big Ten Tourney. And I wondered why we didn’t see it sooner. What I don’t like: None of the players most responsible for that late surge — Alonzo Verge, Trey McGowens and Bryce McGowens — are back this year. This team is going to stink so badly that it’ll come with clouds, like Pig-Pen from Peanuts.

You might be right. But context does matter. Comparing records from past years is precarious at best. For instance, the B1G how has 20 conference games. During Miles years it was 18, which meant 2 extra cupcakes on the schedule each year. During Doc's tenure, it was only 16 conference games, and Doc certainly knew how to load up on cupcakes. In Mile's first year, 9 of his 15 wins were non-conference (and he also lost by 16 to UTEP). His conference record was 5-13, and 3 of those 5 wins were against hapless Penn St and NW. The upcoming 2022-23 schedule is brutal. 20 conference games. Of the 11 non-conference games, 7 are against power 5 teams and only 1 of the 7 are home games. I would challenge anyone to find a more difficult non-conference schedule in the history of Husker Hoops, and then tack on the 20 conference games in the deepest conference in the nation. I'm not sure why Hoiberg basically dug his own grave with this non-conference schedule, but no doubt at the end of the season everybody will be comparing his end of year record to those of Doc and Collier when they aren't even remotely similar in difficulty.

It is going to be interesting to see how fans (including many on this board) react if this team plays hard, with grit, effort and cohesion, and yet still loses a lot of games because they simply do not have enough (scoring?) talent. I am curious to see if all those who repeatedly say all they want is a team to play hard and together regardless of the record really mean it. One other thought. If a team lacks talent, sometimes things may appear like "selfish" play even if it is not. For instance, if the team lacks scoring talent, at some point someone has to be the one to take the shot. It may not be a great shot or open shot because nobody has the talent to break down the defense and either get an open shot or force a double and kick to the open man, and so-forth, which results in a player having to simply "take the shot" that no one else can/will take. It may look like a bad shot and therefore a "selfish" shot, but what is the alternative, no one take a shot?

Well if it makes you feel any better in his 2nd game he shot 2-14 with 3 TOs

To have a successful season this year will require, at a minimum: 1. No major injuries. And Griesel absolutely cannot miss more than 1 or 2 games or its season over. There is no replacement at PG. Honestly am already worried about the 10+ minutes he is on the bench each game getting rest, not sure how that hole is going to be filled. 2. Good team chemistry with great effort and no (or very little) selfish play. This is a big ask in today's landscape. 3. Wilhelm must be a very solid player. We know he has potential, but the limited minutes he got last year were rough. He needs to not only "not be rough", he needs to be good/solid, and it would help if he could hit an occasional three at a decent percentage. 4. Wilcher must take a step-up, preferably a significant step up. He is the best shooter/scorer on a team that is going to have trouble scoring. A good season from his is critical. 5. It would really help if one of the true freshmen could be a solid contributor. Most likely candidates are Lloyd or Lawrence. Lawrence continues to be my dark horse, but question is whether his strong and athletic enough to play in the B1G as a freshman. 6. Keita must be a very solid player, at a minimum. To make a jump into top 10 or Top 7, he must be a beast, or at least as close to a beast as we can expect at Nebraska. Unfortunately this is probably too much to expect from as a raw prospect coming straight from juco off an injury.

Are we ranking them for how they will play this year, or over their career? Obviously, the transfers have a huge advantage over the freshmen for this coming season, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are the better "career" players or have the highest "ceiling" in their college career. Based on this upcoming season only: 1. Griesel - How could it be anyone but Griesel? He is our only legit PG. He is so valuable, if he gets hurt for any period of time, the season is pretty much over. There is no reliable backup PG 2. Gary - this was a toss-up between Gary and Bando, but I will go with Gary because he brings defense and rebounding which is desperately needed. 3. Bando - Basically a Trey replacement. Good defender, decent 3-point shooter. 4. Keita - The top 3 were easy, this is where it starts getting tougher, but I will go with Keita over Lloyd, Lawrence and McPherson just because he is almost guaranteed to have a role, even tho I don't think he will start. 5. Lloyd - This really is a complete toss-up. I want to put Lawrence because he is my darkhorse. And Q is an option because he will likely be in the rotation due to being the backup PG. But I will go with the safe pick in Lloyd based on this length and HS pedigree. For those who have Keita 1st or 2nd, what is your thinking on this. Don't we all agree that Walker will start? And if yes, then Keita is a backup center at best. And he will have competition for minutes from Wilhelm. Or do you think he will start and beat out Walker? Because if he is limited to backup minutes, there is no way he will have a greater impact than Griesel who will probably play 30+ minutes every game, or Bando and Gary who will either start or play 20-25 minutes per game. Just not seeing the logic on that call. With that said, if he is a dominant force that could beat out Walker for the starting center spot, that would be something. Walker was probably our third best player last year, and now he would be coming off the bench because the new guy is better, that would definitely be a step in the right direction, but I just don't see it happening. Regarding McPherson, I struggle with where to put him. He will most likely be in rotation next year because he is the only backup PG. But that fact he couldn't see the floor last year on a terrible team with so many holes and injuries just indicates he isn't a B1G level player, but man I hope that RS year helped him develop and now he shows he is ready for B1G play. If we are basing it on career (or at least the highest ceiling reached during their career), then: 1. Lloyd 2. Lawrence 3. Griesel 4. Keita 5. Bando

This. The improvement coincided with Trey not only returning but getting his legs back. And then Trey's energy and grit rubbed off on his teammates.

That first group might be the worst shooting team in all of college BB. Ha. Inclined to go with the 2nd group as of now. Prediction-- next year's team is going to be almost the exact opposite of this past year's team. Next year's team is going to play with grit and fire and energy and hustle, but is going to struggle in one-on-one situations and struggle to put the ball in the hoop. Then, next year, people are going to say Fred is good at getting his players to play hard, but is clueless coaching offense (the exact opposite of this year). And at some point, people are going to realize that things like grit, hustle, energy, effort, etc., are 90% about the players and about 10% the coach, even tho they thought it was the other way around all of last year. It's an interesting group. I would still prefer he found a true stretch 4 who can also defend and rebound, but this is what we have now. A lot of solid players, but no stars. A little bit of mix-and-match roster. Fred is going to have to earn his money in finding ways to help this group put the ball in the hoop. Primary areas of concern: 1. Backup PG 2. No stretch PF 3. Lack of shooters 4. Rebounding? Possible Wildcard: Lawrence. Really like his game. Only question is whether he is strong enough and athletic enough to step in and play right away in the B1G. If he can, he could be a factor with his shooting and all-around game. Questionmark: Keita. Have to admit, just wasn't that impressed based on the film I watched. Hopefully he was still recovering from the foot injury (or whatever it was) and will be quicker and more explosive than his video.

Some of it depends on which roster you considering for last year--the one where all the players were healthy and playing, or the one where Wilhelm was out almost all of the year and Trey was out (and then still getting his feet under him) over half the season.

I agree this team still has holes to fill, just not sure its primarily SG. If Bryce could average 17 points per game while shooting 27% from 3, I imagine Lloyd could score at least 13+ if he played similar minutes (although probably not as efficient at 2 point FGs). In fact, Lloyd may turn out to be a better scorer than Trey. Lloyd will be a better defender than Bryce, but not near as good as Trey. Also have Lawrence who is 6'4" and a solid all-around offensive player who purportedly can shoot well from 3. I am hoping he is a bit of a sleeper, I like his game. Smooth, confident, nice stoke, but admittedly not super athletic. His ability to defend will probably determine how much playing time he gets. Keisei is a total wild card at this point. He struggled mightily last year, but jucos do tend to take about a year to adjust to power 5 ball. There is still some potential he could improve his 3 point percentage closer to 40%, but his (lack of) defense may prevent him from getting on the court much. Also still a small chance Trey returns. Combine him with Gary and that would make for an elite defensive combo, but very poor offensive duo. Would much rather see a quality stretch PF, but that doesn't seem to be a possibility at this point.

I get what you are saying. I like the Griesel pick up. He is not a difference maker, but a solid all-around player--can shoot a bit can handle a bit, can rebound a bit, defend a bit, etc. But the hope was he would be the "role player" transfer and the next transfer would be the "difference maker". We probably differ here, but I see Walker as a solid "role" player, but not close to a difference maker. Last year we had a decent offense but struggled to defend and rebound. But let's not forget 2 seasons ago, when we had a decent defense (top 40 efficiency) but couldn't score to save our lives. On that team, we had some athletes who couldn't shoot a lick. Shamiel was an explosive strong athlete but couldn't shoot a lick. Delano Banton was 6'8" with mile-long arms, a great athletic, a great rebounder, and could handle the rock. Yet, but the end of the season he was coming off the bench because he couldn't shoot and stifled the offense. Would you rather have Banton (who is currently on an NBA roster) or Juwan? If a guy like Banton couldn't get us more than a couple wins in the B1G, how is Juwan going to make a difference? My point is not to bag on Juwan, I believe he will give great effort and hopefully be a true energy player. But that just isn't enough IMO. Plus, we already have three other players who are 6'6" in Griesel, Lloyd and Dawson. I realize they play different positions, but I am not convinced a 6'6" athlete who can't shoot is the answer to our desperate need for a stretch PF who can open up the floor for the other players to drive, etc.

So if we have just been missing "role players" like Juwan, now that have Juwan, who are our "difference makers" ? Or are you suggesting we can win in the B1G with a team full of just role players?

This team/program has been missing a lot of things, but primarily it has been missing players that are BOTH athletic and skilled. Not just one or the other. We have players that are skilled but not athletic enough to hang in the B1G, and we have some athletes that are not skilled enough to be difference makers in the B1G. At some point, we need to get players that are BOTH athletic and skilled. It's that simple. I agree that Juwan will probably be a contributor, maybe a starter, and will be a solid "role" player. But he appears to be yet another addition that is a one-dimensional player. Do we need a "dog" on this team? Absolutely. But if Trey doesn't return, then it is a wash at best. Based on what little I have seen/read about Juwan, I would probably rather have Trey than Juwan. Trey is a "dog" and he can at least occasionally hit the outside 3 and drive, etc. Right now, we don't need more role players. What we need is a player like Reeves who is athletic and can come in and immediately shoot and get buckets, be a difference maker. Sure, we have stiff competition with teams like Kentucky, etc, recruiting Reeves. But at some point, we need to start getting guys like Reeves if we want to compete for the top half of the B1G. Everyone expects Fred to win at least half his games in the B1G. Is he supposed to do that with significantly inferior talent? With a bunch of one-dimensional players while everyone else has players that are athletic and skilled? I really like the incoming class with Lloyd, Lawrence and Keita, that is a big reason I wanted Fred to return. Fred (and Matt A) beat out some serious blue bloods to get Lloyd. But he will just be a freshman. Was really hoping to land a big-time transfer to compliment that class and be able to come in and really make a difference this year. Because if he doesn't, even if Lloyd, Lawrence, Wilhelm, Keita show a lot of "potential", that probably isn't going to be enough for most on this board, you all expect Fred to get it done this year or bust.

Well, he's listed at 6'5" or 6'6" depending on the source. He was listed as a SF on his recruiting profiles. He averaged 3.4 rebounds per game last year. We are already undersized at the center position with Walker at about 6'7". We don't need to compound it by playing a 6'5" PF. If he is playing PF, it is most likely because he is not skilled enough to play SF or guard not because of his size.

Agreed. Just trying to understand the logic behind this recruit. We are already bringing in two 6'6" athletic recruits in Dawson and Lloyd. Do we really need another one? Especially one that can't shoot (he is career 20% from 3 and a poor free throw shooter). Granted, I have not seen any film on him, but it just seems we have other more urgent needs for next year's roster, including a high level scorer and a legit stretch PF.

Dude looks like he’s 40. I want to see a birth certificate

Granted its on somewhat low volume, but Roby is shooting 44% from 3 this season (52.5% overall)

Dickinson shot 64 3s this season alone. To put that in perspective, Verge only shot 54 all season. Playing Walker and Keita together should be for emergency purposes only We need either Wilhelm to get healthy and be a reliable stretch 4 or recruit one in the portal

that’s fair I guess all I am saying is I am tired of choosing one or the other because in the end they both are going to lose way more than they win. But at least if you start a season with talented players, those talented players may or may not be mentally soft, etc. we don’t know until they get punched in the face. But at least there is a chance they end up being both talented and mentally tough in contrast, if you start a season with a team that is not talented, if winning games is the objective, then it doesn’t matter whether they are mentally tough are not because either way they are going to lose way more than they win. and FWIW, I don’t know how anyone could watch the last 3 years and think NU had a lot of “talented” players on the court.

If all you need is “culture, cohesiveness and toughness, then why did Doc never make the tourney and finish 2-14 and 4-12”? I used Izzo as an example of one coach in the league. I could go down the list if you want. Most teams in the league get their pick of 4 and 5 star talent. And most can coach them up. As a counter example, take former coach Chambers at PSU. He got his players to play with as much toughness and grit as any team in the nation year after year. And in 9 season he made 0 NCAA tourney and 1 NIT tourney and was fired. Not enough talent. Toughness and culture and cohesion didn’t mean squat in the end.

This straw man notion that we must choose between talented but soft players vs untalented but mentally strong players is getting out of hand. Please explain how any coach is going to consistently win in the B1G with bottom level talent. Coach Izzo recruits very talented players, are NU’s untalented but “mentally strong” players going to consistently beat the Spartans? Does Izzo not get his talented players to play hard and execute the fundamentals? The B1G is full of excellent coaches who recruit talent and then coach those talented players to execute and play hard. If most/all teams execute and play good hard team ball, who wins the majority of their games? The team with more talent, obviously. Doc Sadler coached at NU for 6 years. He had mentally strong players who played their but off every minute on the floor. . . And he never went to the NCAA tourney and in his 4th season went 2-14 in Big 12 and 4-12 in his 6th season. This is not a knock on Doc or his coaching. Doc’s issue was always lack of talent. And the B1G is a more talented and better coached league than the Big 12 was when Doc coached. If a team doesn’t have sufficient talent it doesn’t have a chance to win consistently in this league.