gocatsgo2003 said:

Any number of reasons… he decided too late to have good options, explored a bit but didn’t like his options, etc.

Click to expand...

So nu is stuck footing his scholarship while he is choosing to not play? I’m not that familiar with some of these technicalities.

TheC said:

We all have affection for Big Matt, but he's not a very good player. He fills the position, but let's not pretend like he is some game changer. He isn't even our leading rebounder at 7 feet tall.

Click to expand...

My objection was to the post claiming that we only have 2 players.
That is dumb - and unnecessarily pessimistic.

For what its worth, Evan Miyakawa's stat website continues to rank Nicholson as our best player, ahead of Barnhizer - at least the injured Barnhizer that played this year. Nicholson is now rated the 4th best defender in the Big Ten.

FeralFelidae said:

We basically limped into the NCAA Tourney as it was with all the injuries we already had. I think they were the clear #2 in the conference without those injuries. It's a huge credit to their grittiness that the players still won their first-round game.

I know injuries are part of the game, but it's just awful luck to be hit like this two seasons in a row.

Click to expand...

Not to mention we probably are a 6 healthy and I would have bet the farm on making the second weekend as a result 😢

TheC said:

But we're not past it because we had such bad recruiting classes prior to last year, so therefore no depth. You lose two of your top three and have no bench, you suddenly become a bad team. The key going forward is whether recruiting is becoming more consistent after the second wave of success. We'll see. The first class has some promise with KJ and Gelo, but no real studs. The second class looks interesting, but we'll know more next fall.

Click to expand...

Is there a college team that would be viable after losing 2 of their best 3 players? I am thinking the answer is no. Take wolf and goldin off of Michigan, kj and Ivisic off of Illini, and Bailey and Harper off of Rutgers. See what happens. The injuries happened, you’re gonna lose. Perhaps an argument for depth can be made if you lose your 4th and 6th best player, but 2 of top 3, not much can be done.

Styre said:

The season has fallen apart and at this rate we won't even make the conference tournament. NU now sits at #61 in the NET ratings, but still I continue to watch the resume. Rutgers has slipped to Quad 3 and is now officially a bad loss. Penn State is now a Quad 2 loss.

QUAD 1 (2-8)
H #12 Wisconsin - L
A #13 Purdue - L
H #14 Maryland - W
H #18 Illinois - W
A #18 Illinois - L
A #19 Michigan - L
H #21 Michigan State - L
A #32 Oregon - L
A #64 Iowa - L
A #74 Dayton - L

QUAD 2 (2-4)
H #46 Nebraska - L
H #57 Indiana - W
H #66 USC - W
A #78 Penn State - L
N #81 Butler - L
A #93 Washington - L

QUAD 3 (4-1)
H #80 Rutgers - L
N #108 UNLV - W
N #121 Georgia Tech - W
H #123 UIC - W
H #133 DePaul - W

QUAD 4 (5-0)
H #187 Montana State - W
H #208 Northeastern - W
H #243 Pepperdine - W
H #278 Lehigh - W
H #335 Eastern Illinois - W

This week features a Quad 1 road game at Ohio State.

Click to expand...

Appreciate you continuing this despite how things are going!

Purple Pile Driver said:

Since you played the game at a high level, I was just curious as to what your thoughts were on why we appear to miss assignments on defense. I may be wrong, but I usually chalk that up to lack of experience. Many of CCC players have struggled their first year or even second year and then suddenly a light bulb comes on.

Click to expand...

I didn't play at a high level, but when I watch our man to man D, I find it fairly complicated. It relies on switching everyone except the 5, but it also involves a lot of hedging by off ball defenders that seems like there is a judgement call to be made by that defender. Am I actually switching or am I just hedging and then recovering to my man? When the guys execute it correctly, it is a beautiful, shut down D. But I can imagine younger guys messing up a lot until it becomes instinctual.

The season has fallen apart and at this rate we won't even make the conference tournament. NU now sits at #61 in the NET ratings, but still I continue to watch the resume. Rutgers has slipped to Quad 3 and is now officially a bad loss. Penn State is now a Quad 2 loss.

QUAD 1 (2-8)
H #12 Wisconsin - L
A #13 Purdue - L
H #14 Maryland - W
H #18 Illinois - W
A #18 Illinois - L
A #19 Michigan - L
H #21 Michigan State - L
A #32 Oregon - L
A #64 Iowa - L
A #74 Dayton - L

QUAD 2 (2-4)
H #46 Nebraska - L
H #57 Indiana - W
H #66 USC - W
A #78 Penn State - L
N #81 Butler - L
A #93 Washington - L

QUAD 3 (4-1)
H #80 Rutgers - L
N #108 UNLV - W
N #121 Georgia Tech - W
H #123 UIC - W
H #133 DePaul - W

QUAD 4 (5-0)
H #187 Montana State - W
H #208 Northeastern - W
H #243 Pepperdine - W
H #278 Lehigh - W
H #335 Eastern Illinois - W

This week features a Quad 1 road game at Ohio State.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

Purple Pile Driver said:

Since you played the game at a high level, I was just curious as to what your thoughts were on why we appear to miss assignments on defense. I may be wrong, but I usually chalk that up to lack of experience. Many of CCC players have struggled their first year or even second year and then suddenly a light bulb comes on.

Click to expand...

Lack of experience might be the main reason, good chance it is, I don't have the answer for that. But, like most things in life, is definitely not the only one.

Experience with a specific group is another big one, seasoned players or not, the more reps you have the less you miss assignments. We play iterations today for serious minutes we did not in the beginning of the year. I always go back to Syracuse and zone working for them while most teams at a high level bomb when doing it. It's reps, it's experience perfecting it with a group.

Conditioning and physical health come into play. The more tired or banged up you are the more you botch assignments. Same way NBA teams' records fall so much in back to back games. In our case, our guys do look worn out. Maybe I just want to see that as they've been through a lot, but I see Nick wearing something around his knee (and that's not even the foot which he actually mentioned on camera struggling with) and feels a bit like watching Barnhizer earlier and just wondering when is it all going to come crashing down.

Leadership on the court comes into play. Break downs on defense can happen because of execution, like going under when you need to go over the pick and roll on some guy, communication, like assuming another guy knows you switched... Regardless, they can be corrected, or minimized by someone on the court speaking up. It's not just, when gathering your team mates in a circle over a free throw, saying "let's go". It's about correcting certain executions.

Finally, there's leadership from the bench. What the coach does about it. Say we feasted on IL by forcing the Lithuanian kid to switch and be on Martinelli. I'd dare say we won the game on that. Well, the opposing coach can change strategy, not switch on that particular case. This type of coaching is very very hard to evaluate sitting on the couch, bit easier from the stands. It requires a level of attention and engagement that is really something for the sidelines. I don't know what could have been done yesterday. I was not engaged that deeply in our players actions.

I am sure there are more things to point out. In the end we gave up so many 2nd half points. And it did not feel it was because they were particularly hot, it just felt whatever they ran worked.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

GatoLouco said:

I stayed away from pointing fingers regarding the playing smart. The blame probably lies in multiple places. Experience, execution, leadership on the floor, point guard specific play, coaching. We can play that game, but all I wanted was to offer my view on why we lost.

I am not negating we are flawed. Any team without its two best players woud be very flawed. I am not sure why you think I am disagreeing with that. But that does not negate we blew away a 20 point 2nd half lead. It happened with this roster. Being 20 up is overachieving, with this or any roster, but we were. Blowing that lead is underachieving, with this or any roster.

Finally, KJ, I think the overwhelming majority here are optimistic about his future. Not even sure there's anyone who isn't. The discussion is not about that, it's about how uch we use players. Since Clayton burned his shirt, we should use both. I personally just don't see how Clayton should start or get more than 10-15. KJ is our future and even, right now, his way better than him.

Take yesterday as an example. I have not looked at the box score. I have zero statistics to say this other than my (possible lying) eyes: KJ was a mile better than Clayton, even if they were both bad. He tried to make things happen when Mullins, Clayton and Ciaravino were not. He created a few good looks. Ball did not go in, but he was not a bowling pin on the permiter dribbling and passing the ball around.

Click to expand...

Since you played the game at a high level, I was just curious as to what your thoughts were on why we appear to miss assignments on defense. I may be wrong, but I usually chalk that up to lack of experience. Many of CCC players have struggled their first year or even second year and then suddenly a light bulb comes on.

Purple Pile Driver said:

No one that I know of is saying KJ won’t be a good player for us. You can say we didn’t play smart basketball and that may be true. The question then begs why? Coaching? Players lacking experience? Players without the requisite skill set? Honest question.

Look, nothing out there changes my opinion that we are playing with limited offensive weapons and the Frosh flat out aren’t ready. No shame to that. Not sure how that would be controversial . Frankly, I like this team way more than the Nance/Kopp Young editions despite the results.

Click to expand...

I stayed away from pointing fingers regarding the playing smart. The blame probably lies in multiple places. Experience, execution, leadership on the floor, point guard specific play, coaching. We can play that game, but all I wanted was to offer my view on why we lost.

I am not negating we are flawed. Any team without its two best players woud be very flawed. I am not sure why you think I am disagreeing with that. But that does not negate we blew away a 20 point 2nd half lead. It happened with this roster. Being 20 up is overachieving, with this or any roster, but we were. Blowing that lead is underachieving, with this or any roster.

Finally, KJ, I think the overwhelming majority here are optimistic about his future. Not even sure there's anyone who isn't. The discussion is not about that, it's about how much we use players. Since Clayton burned his shirt, we should use both. I personally just don't see how Clayton should start or get more than 10-15. KJ is our future and even, right now, is way better than him.

Take yesterday as an example. I have not looked at the box score. I have zero statistics to say this other than my (possible lying) eyes: KJ was a mile better than Clayton, even if they were both bad. He tried to make things happen when Mullins, Clayton and Ciaravino were not. He created a few good looks. Ball did not go in, but he was not a bowling pin on the permiter dribbling and passing the ball around.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

Davidgolds5 said:

Why wouldn’t he have done that after the first season? So we were unable to get another transfer player?

Click to expand...

Any number of reasons… he decided too late to have good options, explored a bit but didn’t like his options, etc.

PurpleWhiteBoy said:

Nicholson has been our best big for 3 seasons.
2 players?
What is wrong with you?

Click to expand...

We all have affection for Big Matt, but he's not a very good player. He fills the position, but let's not pretend like he is some game changer. He isn't even our leading rebounder at 7 feet tall.

Baz=Heisman said:

Yes. Regardless of who is on the floor. We should be past this at this point. Simply unacceptable.

Click to expand...

But we're not past it because we had such bad recruiting classes prior to last year, so therefore no depth. You lose two of your top three and have no bench, you suddenly become a bad team. The key going forward is whether recruiting is becoming more consistent after the second wave of success. We'll see. The first class has some promise with KJ and Gelo, but no real studs. The second class looks interesting, but we'll know more next fall.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

This is premium content. Please subscribe to view.

FeralFelidae said:

We basically limped into the NCAA Tourney as it was with all the injuries we already had. I think they were the clear #2 in the conference without those injuries. It's a huge credit to their grittiness that the players still won their first-round game.

I know injuries are part of the game, but it's just awful luck to be hit like this two seasons in a row.

Click to expand...

Buie
Langborg
brooks
Martinelli
A very good foursome.

PurpleWhiteBoy said:

Had Buie gotten hurt last year it would have been a total disaster.

Click to expand...

We basically limped into the NCAA Tourney as it was with all the injuries we already had. I think they were the clear #2 in the conference without those injuries. It's a huge credit to their grittiness that the players still won their first-round game.

I know injuries are part of the game, but it's just awful luck to be hit like this two seasons in a row.