How did our program fall apart?
- Thread starter DocCat2
- Start date
I would give him another chance for a year.
Assistant coaches were changed. Lowry and Mac are in their first years with the program. Battle is in his second. He scored over 2500+ points for Penn State and w as s not being ball dominate. Plus being from New York he is going to look for skill, plus tougher recruits.
Mac is a NU guy as stated above.
Offensively they do get decent shots. Might not like who is shooting them, but decent looks.
As a opposed to Fitz who has not changed a thing on staff, cannot get hull the ball in space and the defense has issues. He does not attempy to address issues..
Assistant coaches were changed. Lowry and Mac are in their first years with the program. Battle is in his second. He scored over 2500+ points for Penn State and w as s not being ball dominate. Plus being from New York he is going to look for skill, plus tougher recruits.
Mac is a NU guy as stated above.
Offensively they do get decent shots. Might not like who is shooting them, but decent looks.
As a opposed to Fitz who has not changed a thing on staff, cannot get hull the ball in space and the defense has issues. He does not attempy to address issues..
I often wonder if we get good, fairly open, shots because our opponents have studied us on film and know how to get our lesser shooters to shoot.
For me, I hate isolation ball ( James harden). NU seems run high screen roll. Dribble handoff screens or screen away and cut to the ball,
Guard to guard, most teams will switch. Guard to big you usually get a Guard trailing and have to key off the defensive big man. If he hedges and cuts the Guard coming off the screen, NU big man should roll, if he doesn't Guard should get the ball and make decision, pass either week or strong side or go to the basket.
Floppy, you have a double staggered screen in one side and a single screen on the other. Shooter starts under the basket and picks a side. After delivering the ball, the poi t guard would screen away. What I like about this is if they over play the shooting guard he can stop and screen for someone else to get open.
All the teams scout each other, that's why you need players to bust their butts to get open, set screens and make shots.
Guard to guard, most teams will switch. Guard to big you usually get a Guard trailing and have to key off the defensive big man. If he hedges and cuts the Guard coming off the screen, NU big man should roll, if he doesn't Guard should get the ball and make decision, pass either week or strong side or go to the basket.
Floppy, you have a double staggered screen in one side and a single screen on the other. Shooter starts under the basket and picks a side. After delivering the ball, the poi t guard would screen away. What I like about this is if they over play the shooting guard he can stop and screen for someone else to get open.
All the teams scout each other, that's why you need players to bust their butts to get open, set screens and make shots.
This is certainly why we haven't bounced back quicker, but I don't think it's why we couldn't keep the momentum going. My sense is that the combination of playing in Rosemont (a neutral court at best) plus certain elements of our program feeling like we'd arrived and didn't need to work as hard were the things that doomed us most. From there, our best players left and we couldn't build off their success.
I also said this last year (to a decent amount of resistance) -- between NIL and the portal, our football and basketball programs are in big, big trouble. If not for BTN, we'd be back in the true dark ages.
I think the NU scholarships are for 4 years and other 4 1 year scholarships. So to your point, we are at a disadvantage with the transfer portal. We cannot get a new transfer in until one officially leaves.
Other schools are different. Once a p,Ayer decides to leave, the scholarship is pulled and they can get another player.
NU seems to be catching up with regard to NIL, slowly. They just did the 5980 stipend this year and signed with a company to help with NIL opportunities.
Other schools are different. Once a p,Ayer decides to leave, the scholarship is pulled and they can get another player.
NU seems to be catching up with regard to NIL, slowly. They just did the 5980 stipend this year and signed with a company to help with NIL opportunities.
The would be true if NU used all 13 scholarships. But it has been many years since that happened.
I said this when they announced the football stadium renovation. Pat Ryan’s money would have been better served funding an NIL endowment fund.
I think the reason they don’t have 13 scholarship players is because they literally can’t find 13 BIG quality players who want to play at NU. If you follow their offer lists each season, they frequently don’t even have as many offers out as they have openings.
13 BIG players with the grades
For 2023 they have 3 committed, but 4 went to other schools ( Princeton, Notre Dame, Miami, Virgina Techl and waiting on Carr.
Already have 3 offers for 2024.
For 2023 they have 3 committed, but 4 went to other schools ( Princeton, Notre Dame, Miami, Virgina Techl and waiting on Carr.
Already have 3 offers for 2024.
The entire Big Ten gives 4-year scholarships, not just NU.
Don't recall you using that as a crutch/excuse back when you were touting CC's recruits/his recruiting ability.
While BMac was the captain of the O, Lumpkin captained the D, but he also was the "enforcer" that brought everyone in line (there are a # who poo-poo'd Lumpkin's contribution on the court, both as a player and how he was the glue, despite CC's own statements as to that).
Tap was also a facilitator of this off the court - hosting meals which got all the factions together.
Back in the day, the student section was unduly harsh on Gill and Liberty.
Reason why it fell apart is b/c CC didn't know how to build a successful team/roster, being overly infatuated w/ recruiting stretch 4s and wings.
When those stretch 4s and wings couldn't shoot 3s w/ any consistency, that became a problem b/c neither could drive to the basket w/ any consistency as well - hence, all those awful, prolonged scoring dry-spells.
They also couldn't rebound or play D well enough, esp to overcome
This is really puzzling b/c CC had the template in the Tourney team, portions of which he happened to luck into.
That Tourney team was balanced (opponents couldn't focus on shutting down 1-2 players) - had some 3 point shooting, ability to drive to the basket (or roll to the basket for an alley-oop), and could play tough D and rebound.
Lumpkin, Law and Lindsey were the triangle perimeter defenders w/ Pardon manning the paint (don't think Pardon was CC's typical choice to man the 5, but like I have stated before, Pardon was the most important recruit of CC's tenure) and pretty much everyone could grab rebounds.
Off the bench, Tap was a reliable 3 point specialist and Skelly brought "annoying" energy subbing in at the 4 or 5 spots.
That Tourney team was decent/good at most things and very good on D.
Once that core departed, hard pressed to find what the subsequent teams were good at.
The subsequent teams repeatedly had among the most inefficient Os in the country, w/ the D nowhere being good enough (they weren't as good on D as the early CC team led by Crawford) to make up for it.
Aside from Law (mostly for D), CC's highly touted 4* recruits didn't make much of an impact their frosh seasons and/or beyond.
Basically got 1-1.5 good season(s) out of Nance (late bloomer) - and even then, wouldn't consider being someone who could carry the team.
As have stated before, w/ all these repeated misfires, CC needed to change his recruiting philosophy and coaching/development of players.
All these nationally touted players from the NE or elsewhere haven't panned out (for some reason, they seem to lose their shot when they arrive in Evanston), so CC needs to concentrate on more regional players where he and the staff have gotten a closer/more in depth look.
When those stretch 4s and wings couldn't shoot 3s w/ any consistency, that became a problem b/c neither could drive to the basket w/ any consistency as well - hence, all those awful, prolonged scoring dry-spells.
They also couldn't rebound or play D well enough, esp to overcome
This is really puzzling b/c CC had the template in the Tourney team, portions of which he happened to luck into.
That Tourney team was balanced (opponents couldn't focus on shutting down 1-2 players) - had some 3 point shooting, ability to drive to the basket (or roll to the basket for an alley-oop), and could play tough D and rebound.
Lumpkin, Law and Lindsey were the triangle perimeter defenders w/ Pardon manning the paint (don't think Pardon was CC's typical choice to man the 5, but like I have stated before, Pardon was the most important recruit of CC's tenure) and pretty much everyone could grab rebounds.
Off the bench, Tap was a reliable 3 point specialist and Skelly brought "annoying" energy subbing in at the 4 or 5 spots.
That Tourney team was decent/good at most things and very good on D.
Once that core departed, hard pressed to find what the subsequent teams were good at.
The subsequent teams repeatedly had among the most inefficient Os in the country, w/ the D nowhere being good enough (they weren't as good on D as the early CC team led by Crawford) to make up for it.
Aside from Law (mostly for D), CC's highly touted 4* recruits didn't make much of an impact their frosh seasons and/or beyond.
Basically got 1-1.5 good season(s) out of Nance (late bloomer) - and even then, wouldn't consider being someone who could carry the team.
As have stated before, w/ all these repeated misfires, CC needed to change his recruiting philosophy and coaching/development of players.
All these nationally touted players from the NE or elsewhere haven't panned out (for some reason, they seem to lose their shot when they arrive in Evanston), so CC needs to concentrate on more regional players where he and the staff have gotten a closer/more in depth look.
Last edited:
Stretch 4 is needed in today's game, that why the BIG struggles in the tournament with athletic teams
Only two northeast guys on the team. Berry is supposed to be the shooter but is not comsistant. Missed out on loughlane, he is going to Davidson.
Players have to work in their game and play at the proper weight to be strong enough to shoot and drive.
Only two northeast guys on the team. Berry is supposed to be the shooter but is not comsistant. Missed out on loughlane, he is going to Davidson.
Players have to work in their game and play at the proper weight to be strong enough to shoot and drive.
They can’t find 13 basketball players willing to take their offer.
I agree with that point not finding players to able to play that spot.
Young should have been able to do it, he just refused to improve that shot in the four years he was here. There goes his NBA experience Kopp as well. At least Nance tried
Best example is Luca Garza from Iowa. He is on his 3rd team because he never improved his game. Player of the year his last year in college.
Young should have been able to do it, he just refused to improve that shot in the four years he was here. There goes his NBA experience Kopp as well. At least Nance tried
Best example is Luca Garza from Iowa. He is on his 3rd team because he never improved his game. Player of the year his last year in college.
Almost everyone considers Pete Nance an excellent stretch 4 who can really shoot.
I hope that Collins never again blunders as badly as he did last year when it came to Pete Nance - playing him out of position at the 5, forcing him to defend bigger players, wearing him out for no reason. He was, is and will always be a stretch 4. And we had a decent center (Young) and a raw backup (Nicholson) - it was a perfect set-up roster-wise. And Collins squandered it completely.
We will have to disagree on that and that's OK. They are great kids, for sure. Basketball, they would be bench players for me. To soft
Look at the big for St. Peters last year, they welcomed the challenge of playing against bigger players
Marcus smart converting 3mbid last night.
I would like to see the coaching staff send a message during the first two scrimmages.
Get beat up and down the court, out the game
Don't get a 50/50 ball, out the game
Miss a box out and give up an offensive rebounds, out the game
Miss a defensive rotation, out the game.
Matt should be beating the crap out of everybody.
Has nothing to do with skill, but teach them to compete.
Some kids will quit on you, but you mht find 5 or 6 that get it.
That's what was special about McIntosh, he competed.
Marcus smart converting 3mbid last night.
I would like to see the coaching staff send a message during the first two scrimmages.
Get beat up and down the court, out the game
Don't get a 50/50 ball, out the game
Miss a box out and give up an offensive rebounds, out the game
Miss a defensive rotation, out the game.
Matt should be beating the crap out of everybody.
Has nothing to do with skill, but teach them to compete.
Some kids will quit on you, but you mht find 5 or 6 that get it.
That's what was special about McIntosh, he competed.
Not that I understand the recruiting portion well at all, but it always felt to me we could have filled those spots with grand transfers. They would not burn available schollies for the following year. Even if they saw zero minutes, it seems imperative to have capable bodies to practice.
If you want toughness, you can’t recruit a whole bunch of 6’8” jump shooters.
Disagree.
Barkley just transferred to Putnam Science. PS just put one of their bags at Kentucky. This year's big is going to Alabama, Multiple D1 players on their roster. He is going to be in a culture where playing the way I just mentioned is the norm. It will get him prepared for college and he can shoot.
Barkley just transferred to Putnam Science. PS just put one of their bags at Kentucky. This year's big is going to Alabama, Multiple D1 players on their roster. He is going to be in a culture where playing the way I just mentioned is the norm. It will get him prepared for college and he can shoot.
We are on the same page about toughness. Or I'd call it physicality.
Nicholson was physical and overly energized, but got whistled for a foul every time he leaned on an opponent. That was a problem - a combination of his inexperience and bad refs.
He sat there at the end of the bench, never playing, and then Collins would just throw him in there against experienced players. Not exactly ideal preparation.
Barnhizer is physical and a solidly built small forward. Audige and Roper are physical for their size.
Nance and Beran (in my opinion) were similar players - stretch 4's. When they were on the court together, we were soft. You can get away with one big guy who is a perimeter player, but not two at the same time. Not in the Big Ten.
Hunger and Nicholson will bring the physicality this year, but Collins absolutely must adjust his thinking to fit his roster.
Last edited:
We are/were not soft on defense; check the stats. (Though I wish we were better defending the 3). As noted earlier, it’s all about offense and putting the ball in the basket.
Thats a good question.
In the Media Day transcript, if you read it, there are some comments that are a bit alarming...
Audige said "Boo and I have gotten to know each other, my point guard knows where I like to get the ball..."
And he added that he thought he improved his shot selection last season...
(Audige struggled so badly last year on offense that I can't imagine what he is thinking)
Buie said something like "Me being one of the best players on the team, guys listen to me..."
(Thats just not a good comment)
Buie, Beran and Audige are going to be taking the vast majority of the shots - and we know they will miss most of them. That leaves old school offensive rebounding as a source for scoring.
I remain optimistic about Hunger, Nicholson, Barnhizer and Roper playing well this year. I'm not optimistic that the offense will be designed to incorporate any of them.
Fun with numbers:
2019/2020 - young, young, young
The gains on offense? so debatable and so easy to think any positive came from being older and more experienced, and not by being better. Last year, we even shot a lower % than in 19/20. In the easiest conference of the last 3 seasons.
Oh, what could have been.
2019/2020 - young, young, young
- 3 wins - B1G is the #1 conference per T-Rank, slightly above BE and B12
- Bunch of young kids
- Nance played as a 4
- Beran played, more than half the games, as a 3
- I believe we were top 10 in average height in the country
- Our starting 5 of Spencer/Kopp/Beran/Nance/Young might have been the tallest in the country
- NU's B1G FG%: 41.0%
- NU's opponent FG% in B1G play: 42.0%
- FG% Gap: -1.0%
- 6 wins - B1G is the #1 conference per T-Rank, considerable above B12 and P12
- Significantly more seasoned with starters having logged serious minutes the previous year
- Nance is the 5
- Young is a bench player
- NU's B1G FG%: 43.2%
- NU's opponent FG% in B1G play: 45.2%
- FG% Gap: -2.0%
- 7 wins - B1G is the #2 conference per T-Rank, below B12 and slightly above the SEC
- A veteran team
- Nance is the 5
- Young is a bench player
- NU's B1G FG%: 40.8%
- NU's opponent FG% in B1G play: 44.0%
- FG% Gap: -3.2%
The gains on offense? so debatable and so easy to think any positive came from being older and more experienced, and not by being better. Last year, we even shot a lower % than in 19/20. In the easiest conference of the last 3 seasons.
Oh, what could have been.
What stats would you look at to determine if we were/are soft on defense?
I'm saying that we were soft defensively when Beran and Nance were in the game together.
Neither is a physical player and if thats your front court, you will be pushed around. Especially when you are also undersized at small forward.
And thats what happened.
Offense is 50% of the game. Defense is 50% of the game. So it isn't all about offense.
I have very low expectations this season, but if we are going to surprise anyone, it will be because Buie and Audige light things up. Like it or not, they are the most likely players to emerge as stars.
Stats are great, but if you have a opponent that shoots 3 for 10. That's 30 percent.hoewever if you foul him 5 times and he goes9 for 10 from the line. That's not good.
This happened quite a few times. Opponents shoot and miss, get the rebound and miss, get the rebound and score. That's 1 for 3 and not getting the rebound does not provide NU opportunities on offense. They need as many opportunities on offense as they can get.
Our favorite, make a good play on defense, we come down Jack a three ormissa layup, other team gets the rebound and goes down and scores. That's 4 to 5point swing. There were too many of those.
The situation matters as well.
This happened quite a few times. Opponents shoot and miss, get the rebound and miss, get the rebound and score. That's 1 for 3 and not getting the rebound does not provide NU opportunities on offense. They need as many opportunities on offense as they can get.
Our favorite, make a good play on defense, we come down Jack a three ormissa layup, other team gets the rebound and goes down and scores. That's 4 to 5point swing. There were too many of those.
The situation matters as well.
Gordie says check the stats because they prove we were not soft defensively when Beran and Nance were playing together.... so I ask him "Which stats would you use to prove that"
It was a serious question to an assertion he made and... he doesn't respond.
I find that rather weak.
I hope he's ok.
You’re on Ignore for me, PWB, so I don’t always see your notes. I should report you for saying I am weak.
I am fine - thanks, but I can sense from your comment above and others you’ve made that you really don’t care. All you care about is defending your opinions at any cost; even at the risk of losing any amount of integrity you may have.
I was referring to KenPom AdjDef stats. We are markedly better in defense than offense.
EvanMiya CBB Analytics
Advanced college basketball analytics, home of the Bayesian Performance Rating
evanmiya.com
That's me who does not like stats. But I found this guy interesting
Thanks for replying. Thats all I ask. You make a claim, you defend it... right?
Why do you have to question my motives and integrity when all I asked you to do was clarify what you were saying?
Yes, we were terrible offensively. We were the worst team in the Big Ten on offense.
We ran a dumb offense that didn't play to our strengths, in my opinion. We had the lowest Effective Field Goal Percentage of all 14 teams. Most of that is on Audige, who was one of our least effective players on offense, but shot the ball as frequently as Buie, Nance and Young.
Our defense was about average for the league. But Ken Pom's Adjusted Defense stat doesn't account for which guys were playing at which times. My assertion was the we were soft when Beran and Nance were out there as our frontcourt.
Similar threads
