Here is a little bit on Barnhizer from the Indanapolis Star on Mr. Indiana candidates
Barnhizer,,,,
- Thread starter loyolacat
- Start date
Have never seen Barnhizer play, but he didnt get too many notable offers outside of Xavier and Butler.
The kid from Detroit, Julian Roper, got offers from Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio State, Alabama, Missouri, Illinois and several others. He's the one to watch.
The kid from Detroit, Julian Roper, got offers from Wisconsin, Iowa, Ohio State, Alabama, Missouri, Illinois and several others. He's the one to watch.
Yeah, Xavier and Butler, pffft! What do those guys know about winning basketball? The parody posts continue!!
There was a guy name John Shurna with an offer from Eastern Washington. He didn’t turn out too bad😀
Butler, in particular, has historically done a fantastic job of recruiting. My only issue/concern is that he didn't get an offer from Purdue since they have certainly had a lot of chances to see him.
Those numbers are so gaudy I'm also curious why Purdue (and maybe even IU) didn't come calling. But yeah, offer lists aren't everything. Reggie Hearn was a walk on!
100% true. And based on rankings CC tops the Butler recruiting classes. They simply either have a better eye or develop better. Or both.
He's not the elite athlete that most "name" programs look for, but hard to argue against his production.
Agreed. Concern was too strong a word. I actually checked to see who had extended Gordon Heywood offers, since he is Butler's best recruit in the past 20 plus years. It was Butler, Purdue and IUPUI. I thought NU was definitely interested but maybe we never offered.
Not getting an offer from Purdue just makes me think that perhaps he is not a great athlete, because his skill level seems really high. He just didn't have a lot of guys his size guarding him. Certainly not many that were better athletes than him. He will encounter that a lot in college. I am very optimistic he will adjust.
Purdue plays such a specific style that they might not take a good player who doesn’t fit it. If Barnhizer is not 1) a lockdown defender and rebounder, 2) a short guy shooter or 3) over 7 feet tall, he may not be what Painter wanted while still being a Big Ten-caliber player.
That makes sense. They are as much a system team as there is in the BIG. And I don't mean that in a negative way. When we had Carmody it seemed like we only recruited big guys who could shoot the 3 in the PO. And Purdue is good enough that they can find plenty of guys who fit their system.
Yeah, and do most of the guys with offers from mid and low-majors turn out like John Shurna or more like Barrett Benson?
When some of you get defensive like this, it just makes the prospect sound worse than he probably is.
Actually, I checked and Purdue recruited two top 100 players, Caleb Furst and Trey Kaufmann Renn, so they may not have had any room for him. There are 6 finalists for Mr. Basketball in Indiana and the two Purdue recruits are finalists along with Barnhizer.
Well lets see... Matt Nicholson got offers from Creighton and Xavier...
Some of you guys think he's useless
Barnhizer got offers from Butler and Xavier...
The same guys think he's the second coming.
Good luck with your misguided indignation, CoralSpringsCat. You amuse me with your ineptitude.
The fact remains that ROPER got offers from a serious list of topnotch programs.
Some of you guys think he's useless
Barnhizer got offers from Butler and Xavier...
The same guys think he's the second coming.
Good luck with your misguided indignation, CoralSpringsCat. You amuse me with your ineptitude.
The fact remains that ROPER got offers from a serious list of topnotch programs.
Last edited:
I think his point was Roper's offer list was more impressive. He's right.
Not sure if this factored into the recruiting relationship but Barnhizer’s dad transferred out of Purdue as a basketball player in the 80s. Based on his overall production, Barnhizer has good chance to win Mr Basketball. Surprised Goode was not listed as a finalist.
I can't help myself. You say so many slightly to grossly false things that it just drives me crazy. Nobody on this board said that Matt Nicholson was useless. The worst anyone said that I recall was that he needed a redshirt year. Most of that was in response to your many, many posts declaring Collins an idiot and awful coach for not playing him. Barnhizer had a great senior year by any measure so folks are excited to have him join the team. The initial post was just about him being nominated for Mr. Basketball. And then someone said he got to the line a lot so that's encouraging. Then you jump in with your post that his offers weren't very impressive. You have never seen him play but conclude that "Roper is the one to watch." What? I have seen him play and his skill set is very different than Roper's so they can potentially really complement each other. Barnhizer is a scorer and facilitator and we can certainly use that. Roper is a better all-around player and athlete. You need both. Barnhizer scored 27 of his team's 49 points in a 1 point loss to Carmel, the state champions. The next week Carmel played Gary West and held their 4-5 star recruit, Jalen Washington (who has a truly impressive offer list) to 4 points. Butler historically has done a great job of recruiting and has certainly seen him play a bunch, so that's also encouraging. The fact that his offers were less impressive than Roper's doesn't mean he won't be a really good player. The hope is that they will both be really good players. Not sure what the point of your post was but it's info that has already been covered before.
My point was that Roper got offers from a bunch of power programs.
Barnhizer did not.
I never said Barnhizer was a bad player.
I think Roper is the better of the two recruits based on who offered him a scholarship.
Just people grossly over-reacting to a simple, factual comment.
Barnhizer did not.
I never said Barnhizer was a bad player.
I think Roper is the better of the two recruits based on who offered him a scholarship.
Just people grossly over-reacting to a simple, factual comment.
Like I said, it's been covered before and, since you clearly have no idea whether Barnhizer will be good or bad (you have never seen him play and don't know anything about him other than his offer list), just another one of your odd posts in a discussion about a recruit being a finalist for Mr. Basketball.
Collins has recruited some guys who were highly ranked (with very good offer lists) because of their size and shooting ability (Falzon, Kopp and Beran), but proved to be pretty one dimensional on offense. Barnhizer has length and is a good shooter but he is used to creating for his teammates. We need more good all-around basketball players. Guys who are good at passing, ballhandlng and rebounding. Barnhizer and Roper have the potential to be those types of guys. And Roper will be a great defender to boot. They were the best players and leaders on two very good high school teams. Like I said, they are different types of players. I don't think Roper will be a big scorer, especially early in his career. And Barnhizer may struggle to defend. But they are tough, skilled players.
And Casey Simmons also had a great offer list (Georgetown, Miami, BC, Texas, Pittsburgh, Penn State and Xavier) if that is all you are focused on and is a very good athlete. I just don't know if he played against the same level of competition as Barnhizer and Roper. He may have the highest ceiling but I think he is more of a developmental guy. Hope I am wrong and he contributes immediately.
Bottom line, it should be a very good class.
I’m a Butler alum. I’m really upset we didn’t get Barnhizer. I think he’s going to be excellent.
You sure are upset about a factual comment.
Maybe Barnhizer can play. Maybe he will put on some muscle, because it seems like he will need to do that.
All I know is that NU is the only Big Ten team that pursued him.
Nance, Young and Nicholson will provide solid to dominant post play for the next 2 years.
You have to play to the strength of the team.
We primarily need a true point guard who can break down a defense and get the ball inside.
Yes. We will have success by focusing on getting the ball down low. Sure. That't the ticket. Let's ride Young and Nicholson to the tournament! Got it. And we're done!
I remember all the Ty Berry posts last year too. Let’s see how the kid plays at this level before crowning him the next Shurna
The Nance/Young combo, when one of them gets the ball down low is, by far, the biggest mismatch we were able to create last year. Nance, despite being agile for his height, does not create much of a mismatch outside, hence why the 5 out, Nance at 5, failed miserably. Getting the ball down low does not mean Nance and/or Young scoring 30. It means a different way to get the defense off balance.
If you believe, like CC obviously does, that we create more problems praying that our back court beats defenders off the dribble coming (or not) off dribble hand offs, I understand. But don't make it sound ridiculous that we actually have very capable players inside. IMO, way more capable relative to other teams. Last year, other than against MI with Dickinson/Wagner being so long, we saw mismatches. And way more often than not, when the ball went in, the other team double teamed. That should make all the posters here, who are only infatuated by Audige-like athleticism and fail to see the value of the foot work of Young-like long and tall YMCA athleticism, evaluate how they see the game.
All we know for sure about all freshman is that they will score somewhere between zero and 16 points per game. Recruiting rankings outside of the top ten are guesses, and even the top ten are largely guesses.
You stated that very well.
When Young and Nance were on the court together over the last 13 games of the season, we outscored our opponents. We just didn't play them together nearly enough.
If you outscore your opponents in the Big Ten, you should be a tournament team (or close to it).
I think a lot of naysayers on here simply fail to understand what Young brings to the table, passing the ball and defending. Offensively, If you look at points per 40 minutes in the conference last year, it was...
Nance 16.5
Audige 16.4
Young 15.3
Buie 15.1
Kopp 12.7
Berry 12.1
Beran 9.5
Greer 8.8
Gaines 7.4
and yet Beran and Gaines both played more than Young.
I would say outside the top 40-50 are guesses. But I'm generally with you.
I just took a quick look at Nance's class of 2018. It's pretty mind blowing when you look at it with some perspective. In the top 50-100 - at least in that class - for every Horton-Tucker, Oturu and Jaxson Hayes, you have three guys scoring in single digits.
And that's where NU HOPES to live - 50-100.
OTOH, Baylor has two nice players from its team in that class. But there's not a wide range of teams living large at 50-100.
I agree with your sentiment, but wanted to point out that Ty Berry had some positive "hidden" stats last year.
His playing time weighted "+/-" over the last 13 games was 2nd best on the team, narrowly beaten by Ryan Young.
He was also "preferred teammate" for Kopp, Audige and Buie, based on their "+/-" when on the court with any specific teammate. We outscored our opponents when any of those 3 was on the court with Ty Berry. When Buie, Audige or Kopp was out there without Ty Berry, we were outscored overall.
So he does some things fairly well.
I see the game fine and I see the value in getting Young touches. I am fine finding creative ways to get him more touches when he is on the floor, particularly at the end of games. He's an important piece of the offense. I don't think we are going to win many games running our offense through him, though, which I thought was the suggestion. His footwork is great and he's our most consistent scoring option. But he's not a dominating offensive player, he's not a great passer and he doesn't always react quickly to double teams (which can lead to turnovers). If defenses prepare for an offense in which the primary goal is to get the ball into Young in the post, they will adjust and he will have a lot more turnovers. The kid from Loyola (similar athlete) is just much better in facilitating the offense, often from outside of the lane. The 5 out failed miserably because Buie went ice cold (and needs to improve in pick and rolls), Beran wouldn't shoot and Kopp missed a lot of open 3s. If Beran is not contributing 10 plus points a game and hitting open 3's at a good percentage, then we don't seem to have a choice but to play Nance and Young together 30 minutes a game. Oh, and Audige's footwork is also outstanding on some his shots. It's not just athleticism. We should actually try to get him more opportunities with his back to the basket.
I agree, because the ball down low thing is not just for bigs. If Audige improves his decision making he could do a lot of damage with his back to the basket. As to some extent, Gaines was also capable of taking advantage down low. But that's not how CC rolls.
You mentioned Krutwig. I don't disagree with your assessment. What he has in common with Young that limits him is the lack of a 3 pt shot. Which actually Young has shown flashes he might develop. Another comparable, Drew Timme. Much much better player than Young, but also not a shooter. Young is a poor man's Timme. Both Krutwig and Timme don't play the old school Kareem type of back to the basket. Kareem was a lot able to just be in front of his defender whenever he wanted. Krutwig or Timme, just like Young, float outside, set picks. But unlike Young in our offense have movements after setting picks (or not) to set them up to get the ball down low in front of their defender.
Finally, it's not just Young, Nance has to touch the ball down low a lot more too.
Good analysis. Like I said, I am all for getting Young (and others) more touches down low in the flow of the offense. He's an offensive weapon that we can certainly use more effectively. He is not a good facilitator like the other two guys, though, so my concern is more running the offense through him. Buie averaged 2 turnovers a game (and took a ton of criticism for it) while being the primary ball handler. Young averaged 1.4 turnovers a game (and 1.5 assists) in less minutes and with a lot less touches. I think he will struggle if he is asked to carry the offense like Krutwig.
Agree on this point: Nance was showing some skills with that hook shot he developed over the season. With his length, he became very effective with it and was very difficult to defend. Would like to see that more next season.
Nance has to be the focal point of the offense next year, but we also need shooters to take pressure off of him. For all the talk about Young down low, he was only 6th-best on the team at close 2s from a shooting percentage standpoint at 64.4%. Gaines, Nance and Audige all shot over 70% from that range. Buie was absolutely dreadful though and really needs to improve that aspect of his game.
Love the sky hook that Nance added to his repertoire this season. Not easy to defend. He should only get better with it the more uses it and more confidence he gets with it, ala Kareem.
Per 40 minutes of conference play
Nance 16.5 pts, 58.5% from 2, 9.3 reb, 2.5 asst, 0.8 stl, 0.9 blk, 2.0 to
Young 15.3 pts, 58.5% from 2, 9.1 reb, 2.6 asst, 1.1 stl, 0.9 blk, 3.0 to
(source https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/northwestern/2021.html)
Nance attempted 4 threes every 40 minutes, making 1.4, or 34%. Young didn't really do that.
However, using points scored and allowed (+/-) for every lineup for the last 13 games...
Lineups using Young without Nance projected to a 66.4 - 56.8 loss in the typical game.
Lineups using Nance without Young projected to a 75.1 - 62.7 loss in the typical game.
but
when Nance teamed with Young the results projected to a 63.0 - 58.3 VICTORY in the typical game.
So pairing Nance with Young didnt affect our scoring, but we were 17 points better defensively per game.
Pairing Young with Nance improved our scoring by 6.2 pts and our defense by 8.1 pts.
Whatever we were doing when Nance and Young were out there together, it produced our best results.
Gato explained it nicely. In my interpretation, Young occupies their big guy, freeing Nance offensively. We rebound better on both ends of the floor and defend the post better. Those things show up in the points scored and allowed.
Nance 16.5 pts, 58.5% from 2, 9.3 reb, 2.5 asst, 0.8 stl, 0.9 blk, 2.0 to
Young 15.3 pts, 58.5% from 2, 9.1 reb, 2.6 asst, 1.1 stl, 0.9 blk, 3.0 to
(source https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/northwestern/2021.html)
Nance attempted 4 threes every 40 minutes, making 1.4, or 34%. Young didn't really do that.
However, using points scored and allowed (+/-) for every lineup for the last 13 games...
Lineups using Young without Nance projected to a 66.4 - 56.8 loss in the typical game.
Lineups using Nance without Young projected to a 75.1 - 62.7 loss in the typical game.
but
when Nance teamed with Young the results projected to a 63.0 - 58.3 VICTORY in the typical game.
So pairing Nance with Young didnt affect our scoring, but we were 17 points better defensively per game.
Pairing Young with Nance improved our scoring by 6.2 pts and our defense by 8.1 pts.
Whatever we were doing when Nance and Young were out there together, it produced our best results.
Gato explained it nicely. In my interpretation, Young occupies their big guy, freeing Nance offensively. We rebound better on both ends of the floor and defend the post better. Those things show up in the points scored and allowed.
Furst Named Indiana’s Mr. Basketball
INDIANAPOLIS – Fort Wayne Blackhawk's Caleb Furst was named Mr. Basketball for the 2020-21 boys basketball season.
www.inkfreenews.com
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
FOOTBALL Five things to look for at Northwestern's open spring practice
- Latest: gocatsgo2003
-
-