+/- for the Unexpected Scoring Club against USC

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

A nice win for the Wildcats, with major (surprising) contributions from Justin Mullins and Keenan Fitzmorris.
Here is the unbiased evaluation...

Player	Minutes	NU Pts	USC Pts	Raw +/-	Player +/-	Net +/-	Box Pts
Mullins	37	77	69	+8	+3.63	+5.23	10.4
Fitzmorris	9	19	13	+6	+3.20	+4.40	5.4
Martinelli	40	77	75	+2	+3.58	+3.98	11.9
Nicholson	27	52	56	-4	+1.98	+1.18	7.4
Windham	5	8	7	+1	-1.4	-1.2	-0.9
Smith	13	27	31	-4	-1.29	-2.09	1.5
Ciaravino	4	4	9	-5	-1.75	-2.75	-2
Leach	32	58	54	+4	-3.79	-2.99	2.2
Berry	32	63	61	+2	-4.16	-3.76	1.7

Three game balls for this one - Mullins, Fitzmorris and Martinelli. Fitzmorris bounced back from 2 poor efforts to post 8 points in 9 minutes, with 4 of 4 free throws and 3 offensive rebounds. And NU was +6 when he was playing center.
Justin Mullins finally played the game we all were (at one time) thinking he could play. Actually it was better than that. 4 of 5 from 3 will do that for you. Add in 7 rebounds and you've had a good night.
More on Mullins below.
Nick Martinelli took a whopping 25 shots, making 11. While that is not "efficient" his 10 offensive rebounds offset 10 missed shots, so his game score was pretty good. He got dinged for missing the front end of 2 one-and-ones.
Our two top guards both struggled from the field, shooting a combined 5 of 23 overall and 2 of 10 from outside the arc. That normally a recipe for disaster.
What Berry and Leach did do, however, was pass the ball into the paint to teammates who then scored easy baskets. We got 17 points from Nicholson and Fitzmorris.

It was a weird game in that USC was suddenly without its star 6'6" point guard Desmond Claude, who had attempted 188 2 point shots and only 37 three pointers. Our defensive gameplan was probably geared toward stopping Claude and USC from getting into the paint. Instead we faced Clark Slajchert, the Penn grad who was near the top of my wish list in last year's transfer portal. We couldn't stop him all night. Something tells me that Slajchert chose poorly when he transferred to USC, where he had been sitting on the bench, looking un-athletic. In the postgame, Martinelli complimented "Slasher" on his performance - and it took me a few seconds to realize who he was talking about - then I laughed. And so did the guys in the Big Ten studio. Guessing "Slasher" was discussed in our locker room at halftime.

Anytime Blake Smith is on the court during a competitive game, one of the scholarship athletes is getting slapped in the face.
When Collins subbed in Smith for Nicholson with 7 minutes to go in the first half he was going small with Martinelli, Mullins, Leach and Berry. If Luke Hunger is healthy, thats a bad sign. We played that lineup for 3:13, winning 4-3, but struggling to score. With 13:18 left in the game and NU leading 48-37, Collins subbed in Ciaravino for Fitzmorris, going small again, with Martinelli, Mullins, Leach and Berry. That lineup played 53 seconds and lost 3-2. Not really sure what that was about. When Jalen Leach got injured with 5:26 to go, NU leading 66-57, Collins subbed in Blake Smith (with Nicholson, Martinelli, Mullins and Berry) instead of the obvious choice (Windham) or Ciaravino. Dave Revsine said, with a hint of incredulity, "I'm not sure if this lineup has played together all year" It didn't go well, as USC outscored us 18-9 to tie the game. And Smith was the weak link. It indicates where the freshmen stand with their coach. When Windham was on the court for NU (5:23) USC scored 7 points. When Smith was on the court (13:09) USC scored 31 points.

Lastly, the fortunes of Angelo Ciaravino and Justin Mullins have undergone seismic shifts since Barnhizer was eliminated from the lineup. Ciaravino had become the 5th starter and that group was killing it. Mullins had been benched entirely for 2 games and hadn't played well in any of the 7 games since the loss at Penn State. He seemed to be sinking into the abyss.

And then Barnhizer got hurt. Mullins and Ciaravino were going to have to take those minutes, defending bigger players, rebounding, scoring. Somebody else (Leach) was going to be running the offense.
Mullins got a chance to hit the reset button. Ciaravino got asked to step up his play. Both got practice time as prospective starters in a Barnhizer-less lineup. The first game against Wisconsin, Ciaravino wilted. Even though the team was +1 when he was in the game, he personally scored a -7.32, primarily due to an 0 for 6 shooting effort and 1 rebound in 20 minutes. Mullins didn't fare much better (NU was -15 when he was playing, but almost all of that was with Fitzmorris). After two turnovers in the first 1:39 against USC, Ciaravino essentially turned the 5th starter's spot over to Mullins. When Collins had Mullins start the 2nd half, he responded with the best half of his NU career. He and Martinelli played all 20 minutes - with Mullins earning a Player Rating of +3.93 to Martinelli's +1.63.

We'll see what happens next. Hopefully Mullins is in a much better place mentally and can capitalize on his success. It would be nice if Angelo Ciaravino would just relax and play. I'm not worried about that with KJ Windham, who just needs more minutes. Blake Smith only in case of emergency, please.

 

[Hungry Jack]

Blake glass in case of emergency

 

[SimpsonElmwood]

The most shocking comment from Musselman's short press conference was Slajchert's +/- was minus 10 and they were getting shredded on D while he was in there. I could not believe it, but when you look at the beginning of the 2nd half USC lost 26-16.

 

[CappyNU]

The most shocking comment from Musselman's short press conference was Slajchert's +/- was minus 10 and they were getting shredded on D while he was in there. I could not believe it, but when you look at the beginning of the 2nd half USC lost 26-16.

Was actually 28-16 on in 17 possessions over the first 11 minutes, so yeah, they were getting absolutely cooked out there. Then they put Agbo in for Slajchert and went +7 over the next 5 and a half minutes (15 points in 8 possessions for them, 8 points in 9 possessions for us) before they brought Slajchert back in. Didn't help that Martinelli missed the front end of two 1-and-1s in that stretch.

 

[loyolacat]

PWB not to be mistaken with PBR....thanks for these break downs and interpretations...enjoyable.......I watched Groundhog Day the other day and am I wrong or does this seem to be an NU situation every year....sometime during the B10 season there is a significant injury and our bench does not seem ready? My point is that CC does not place much of a premium on getting non starters ready to go during the non-con. Often plays starters down to the nub in games that are well in hand....It would seem that with the grind of the B10 you would do well to plan ahead

 

[Hungry Jack]

Watching Illinois vs. Rutgers last night reminded me that 1) even good teams struggle offensively when the outside shots won't fall 2) injuries happen to all teams (Ivisic rolled an ankle last night and could not continue, Harper returned last nigh (and put up 25!)). We aren't the only team beset by these problems. It's college ball.

 

[loyolacat]

exactly...so plan for it.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

PWB not to be mistaken with PBR....thanks for these break downs and interpretations...enjoyable.......I watched Groundhog Day the other day and am I wrong or does this seem to be an NU situation every year....sometime during the B10 season there is a significant injury and our bench does not seem ready? My point is that CC does not place much of a premium on getting non starters ready to go during the non-con. Often plays starters down to the nub in games that are well in hand....It would seem that with the grind of the B10 you would do well to plan ahead

I would not disagree with your assessment.
Its a tough decision for coaches.
One mindset is "Win by as much as you can - You have to impress the computers"
The other is "Win and try to get some young guys experience"

I prefer the latter approach, but thats mainly because I assume injuries will happen and practice only gets you part of what a young player needs to perform well in actual games. I feel the same way about evaluating your roster. What works or doesn't work in intrasquad scrimmages doesn't tell you all that much about what will work against completely different personnel (and coaching philosophies).

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

The most shocking comment from Musselman's short press conference was Slajchert's +/- was minus 10 and they were getting shredded on D while he was in there. I could not believe it, but when you look at the beginning of the 2nd half USC lost 26-16.

That is very interesting. I don't run the opposing +/- numbers, but somebody else on this board had mentioned that Slajchert was a defensive liability - and you could see where he would be - but Musselman citing it after he led USC in scoring is probably just covering his own ass as to why Slajchert is sitting on his bench instead of playing.

On the other hand, he cited Slajchert's +/- as an indication of his performance, so I'm pleased.

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

exactly...so plan for it.

There is no planning for losing 2/3 of your best players for the season.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

There is no planning for losing 2/3 of your best players for the season.

I agree. Barney and Leach didn’t get injured because they played more minutes that some of us would have liked against DePaul. I find that thinking absurd.

As far as getting the bench more minutes, how many blow out victories did we have and who would have suddenly been ready for a major role had they got those 2 additional minutes per game? You don’t need to be Red Auerbach to see the Freshman weren’t close to ready on the defensive end at the start of the season. They still aren’t but they are better. They learn way more in practice than mop up duty in a blow out. The wizard is working with them.

The issue with this team has always been depth. We have 5 players that would have been in the rotation of good B1G teams. I expect one or both of our Frosh to have a break our scoring game before the end of the season. KJ will have to play as he is the only true guard on the roster. Somebody besides Nick and Ty have to shoot the ball. Predictably, the calls for why weren’t they playing in November will ring from the rafters.

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

I agree. Barney and Leach didn’t get injured because they played more minutes that some of us would have liked against DePaul. I find that thinking absurd.

As far as getting the bench more minutes, how many blow out victories did we have and who would have suddenly been ready for a major role had they got those 2 additional minutes per game? You don’t need to be Red Auerbach to see the Freshman weren’t close to ready on the defensive end at the start of the season. They still aren’t but they are better. They learn way more in practice than mop up duty in a blow out. The wizard is working with them.

The issue with this team has always been depth. We have 5 players that would have been in the rotation of good B1G teams. I expect one or both of our Frosh to have a break our scoring game before the end of the season. KJ will have to play as he is the only true guard on the roster. Somebody besides Nick and Ty have to shoot the ball. Predictably, the calls for why weren’t they playing in November will ring from the rafters.

At the start of the season, this team was realistically had the potential to be a solid bubble team, with a ceiling dependent on consistent performances from key players like Nick and Brooks. They needed heavy production from particularly Leach and Berry, who have recently been providing much needed shooting from deep to space the floor and create opportunities for the entire offense. As well as Leach ability to drive and create for others.

However, the freshman class hasn’t yet shown the skill level to log significant minutes on a tournament-caliber team. That’s not fair to expect that of them either. Combine that with preseason injuries, the loss of your two primary ball-handlers, and 3 players who missed essential offseason training, and it became clear this season would be an uphill battle.

The reality is that bench players rarely develop into reliable contributors during the regular season, especially not in the context of a tournament-caliber team. Development happens in the offseason, not in spot minutes during garbage time. Giving bench players 2 minutes a game doesn’t really help them develop at the level needed for postseason play. This team has relied heavily on the starting five, it needed to, and it’s a tough situation when you lose your best players, especially when you're down to 2 out of 3 top guys. The injuries have compounded the challenge, but the team's lack of depth has made it even harder to maintain any semblance of consistency.

In terms of getting the bench ready to contribute in such a short period, the task is daunting. Was Smith supposed to develop into a B1G level starter? Mullins has shown improvement, but did we expect him to make an even bigger jump? The tough reality is that bad luck and lack of depth aren’t a good combination for any program, especially in a highly competitive league like the Big Ten.

Looking ahead to next season, there's significant potential on the roster, but we’ll have to temper expectations. NU’s recruiting strategy often focuses on developmental players (out of necessity) who take 1-3 years to really adjust to the physicality and speed of the Big Ten. So, let’s not get overly worked up next season if the incoming freshmen’s minutes are limited or their production isn’t quite there right away. It’s a process, and patience will be key. I am looking forward to seeing more flashes from the current freshmen as this season continues and hope to see some of it realized next season. Martinelli is a baller and will continue to be fun to watch as well.

 

[GatoLouco]

KJ will have to play as he is the only true guard on the roster. Somebody besides Nick and Ty have to shoot the ball. Predictably, the calls for why weren’t they playing in November will ring from the rafters.

Right now it's not just about who has to play, it's also about a different attitude and aggressiveness on the part of some players. Coach will do his part communicating different expectations. We could see that in the last game when Berry (also Mullins) was being a lot more aggressive than just being a spot up shooter. He was actively looking to drive to the basket.

 

[TheC]

At the start of the season, this team was realistically had the potential to be a solid bubble team, with a ceiling dependent on consistent performances from key players like Nick and Brooks. They needed heavy production from particularly Leach and Berry, who have recently been providing much needed shooting from deep to space the floor and create opportunities for the entire offense. As well as Leach ability to drive and create for others.

However, the freshman class hasn’t yet shown the skill level to log significant minutes on a tournament-caliber team. That’s not fair to expect that of them either. Combine that with preseason injuries, the loss of your two primary ball-handlers, and 3 players who missed essential offseason training, and it became clear this season would be an uphill battle.

The reality is that bench players rarely develop into reliable contributors during the regular season, especially not in the context of a tournament-caliber team. Development happens in the offseason, not in spot minutes during garbage time. Giving bench players 2 minutes a game doesn’t really help them develop at the level needed for postseason play. This team has relied heavily on the starting five, it needed to, and it’s a tough situation when you lose your best players, especially when you're down to 2 out of 3 top guys. The injuries have compounded the challenge, but the team's lack of depth has made it even harder to maintain any semblance of consistency.

In terms of getting the bench ready to contribute in such a short period, the task is daunting. Was Smith supposed to develop into a B1G level starter? Mullins has shown improvement, but did we expect him to make an even bigger jump? The tough reality is that bad luck and lack of depth aren’t a good combination for any program, especially in a highly competitive league like the Big Ten.

Looking ahead to next season, there's significant potential on the roster, but we’ll have to temper expectations. NU’s recruiting strategy often focuses on developmental players (out of necessity) who take 1-3 years to really adjust to the physicality and speed of the Big Ten. So, let’s not get overly worked up next season if the incoming freshmen’s minutes are limited or their production isn’t quite there right away. It’s a process, and patience will be key. I am looking forward to seeing more flashes from the current freshmen as this season continues and hope to see some of it realized next season. Martinelli is a baller and will continue to be fun to watch as well.

I don't care so much about getting young guys experience. What has always bothered me about CCC's style, though, is that he doesn't ever give his top line guys rest in the second half. Maybe a lot of college teams do it this way and it isn't a problem. I don't follow the others closely. But I never understood why he wouldn't sub out his stars for a couple minutes around a tv timeout to allow them to rest their legs and keep some energy in reserve for the final stretch. He does it sometimes in the first half, but never the second half when I'd think they'd need it the most. I always wondered if that was part of why we couldn't close so many close games.

 

[SDakaGordie]

I would not disagree with your assessment.
Its a tough decision for coaches.
One mindset is "Win by as much as you can - You have to impress the computers"
The other is "Win and try to get some young guys experience"

I prefer the latter approach, but thats mainly because I assume injuries will happen and practice only gets you part of what a young player needs to perform well in actual games. I feel the same way about evaluating your roster. What works or doesn't work in intrasquad scrimmages doesn't tell you all that much about what will work against completely different personnel (and coaching philosophies).

You just don’t intentionally give up wins for the sake of developing players. You have to be very darn sure a starter will get injured if that’s the case, and that’s unpredictable. A business does not intentionally overspend/underperform because it hires extra people just in case more people leave than expected.

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

I don't care so much about getting young guys experience. What has always bothered me about CCC's style, though, is that he doesn't ever give his top line guys rest in the second half. Maybe a lot of college teams do it this way and it isn't a problem. I don't follow the others closely. But I never understood why he wouldn't sub out his stars for a couple minutes around a tv timeout to allow them to rest their legs and keep some energy in reserve for the final stretch. He does it sometimes in the first half, but never the second half when I'd think they'd need it the most. I always wondered if that was part of why we couldn't close so many close games.

Take a look at the tight nature of the games this season, and look at the level of depth. This team has less depth than the past two seasons, and that’s a major factor in their struggles. When your primary players (like Buie, Brooks, Audige, and Martinelli) are the ones orchestrating the offense, facilitating ball movement, or creating opportunities for others, it's incredibly difficult to get them off the floor without seeing a significant drop-off in production. The absence of reliable bench contributors who can step in and maintain a solid level of play is a problem.

In basketball, depth is a critical asset because the game is a series of runs. A few bad possessions or missed shots can quickly snowball into a double-digit deficit, especially if your top players are forced to sit for extended minutes. When you don't have capable substitutes who can hold the fort, you run the risk of losing momentum, which is often irrecoverable in the second half. A team without depth is vulnerable to those game-changing runs that can completely shift the dynamic of a contest when the starters are on the bench.

Looking at this team as well as past teams, who steps in to give the key players a breather while still maintaining a competitive level? That’s where the challenge lies. A lack of solid contributors off the bench means the starters are forced to play longer minutes. Often times a tired starter has been better than a fresh bench player. Better to get the rest in the 1st half when you have more time to recover from an opponent scoring run. There’s also a ton of tv timeouts and stops in action especially at the end of close games. Lots of time to get rest there.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

Take a look at the tight nature of the games this season, and look at the level of depth. This team has less depth than the past two seasons, and that’s a major factor in their struggles. When your primary players (like Buie, Brooks, Audige, and Martinelli) are the ones orchestrating the offense, facilitating ball movement, or creating opportunities for others, it's incredibly difficult to get them off the floor without seeing a significant drop-off in production. The absence of reliable bench contributors who can step in and maintain a solid level of play is a problem.

In basketball, depth is a critical asset because the game is a series of runs. A few bad possessions or missed shots can quickly snowball into a double-digit deficit, especially if your top players are forced to sit for extended minutes. When you don't have capable substitutes who can hold the fort, you run the risk of losing momentum, which is often irrecoverable in the second half. A team without depth is vulnerable to those game-changing runs that can completely shift the dynamic of a contest when the starters are on the bench.

Looking at this team as well as past teams, who steps in to give the key players a breather while still maintaining a competitive level? That’s where the challenge lies. A lack of solid contributors off the bench means the starters are forced to play longer minutes. Often times a tired starter has been better than a fresh bench player. Better to get the rest in the 1st half when you have more time to recover from an opponent scoring run. There’s also a ton of tv timeouts and stops in action especially at the end of close games. Lots of time to get rest there.

100%. I would give multiple likes if I could.

 

[Davidgolds5]

100%. I would give multiple likes if I could.

I’m certain we would have lost more games this year and the last couple years if we had rested the starters more. We have been barely getting to 12-8 last Couple years. Could have easily been 9-11 if things were handled differently. We rarely seem to win comfortably, which necessitates best players being in. The talent level from Nicholson to Hunger is huge. You can say that for all the guys who play all the minutes.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

Predictably, the calls for why weren’t they playing in November will ring from the rafters.

You're just trying to cover your bases.

If Ciaravino and Windham play well, obviously you'll hear it - because it would be justified.
And if they don't play well, you're going to hear that Collins should have done more to get them ready because everybody knows injuries happen and you have to get talented freshmen up to speed.

Essentially, this explains exactly why you get minutes for your talented freshmen whenever you can find them.

That is literally why coaches do it.

 

[PURPLECAT88]

You're just trying to cover your bases.

If Ciaravino and Windham play well, obviously you'll hear it - because it would be justified.
And if they don't play well, you're going to hear that Collins should have done more to get them ready because everybody knows injuries happen and you have to get talented freshmen up to speed.

Essentially, this explains exactly why you get minutes for your talented freshmen whenever you can find them.

That is literally why coaches do it.

If Ciaravino and Windham play well, obviously their development has gone well, justifying Collins' choices regarding that development.
And if they don't play well, then it's a good thing they weren't playing enough to cost us games earlier in the year.

This is the internet. The narrative can always fit my pre-conceived notions.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

There is no planning for losing 2/3 of your best players for the season.

Serious question.

In your mind, is there any planning for anything other than perfect?
In November, can you come up with a plan if barnhizer gets re-injured?
Can you come up with a plan if Martinelli misses time?
Nicholson?
Leach?
Berry?

The answer is obviously YES.

So you are essentially advocating no contingency plans?

Its a different matter to say "We lost 2 starters, we aren't going to be as good." Nobody disputes that.
But do you really believe there is nothing a coach can do to lessen the impact of injuries?

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

You just don’t intentionally give up wins for the sake of developing players. You have to be very darn sure a starter will get injured if that’s the case, and that’s unpredictable. A business does not intentionally overspend/underperform because it hires extra people just in case more people leave than expected.

Again, Gordie, you take a statement, distort it, and "argue" with it.
Its just so weak. Are you doing this intentionally?

Who would ever say "Lose on Purpose" to develop the freshman?

I know you can read, but your glasses probably need a reset.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

You're just trying to cover your bases.

If Ciaravino and Windham play well, obviously you'll hear it - because it would be justified.
And if they don't play well, you're going to hear that Collins should have done more to get them ready because everybody knows injuries happen and you have to get talented freshmen up to speed.

Essentially, this explains exactly why you get minutes for your talented freshmen whenever you can find them.

That is literally why coaches do it.

I don’t agree. If they happen to play well it sure as heck doesn’t mean they would have one month ago. Maybe they would have, maybe they wouldn’t, so it proves nothing to me. Maybe it does to you. Either way, you will get to blast CCC. So who is covering their bases. No agenda here at all.

I suspect you will accuse me an others that feel this way ( obviously there are more than just me) as be bandwagon jumpers when they play well down the line. Despite the fact, I have said they will be good players as they gain experience. Probably as early as next year.

It’s not about winning every discussion. It gets tiresome. Yet, you take every opportunity to criticize the limited use of the 2 Frosh without ever acknowledging they have played poorly on both ends of the court recently!

This same situation played out with Big Matt. He flat out wasn’t ready to play at a Big Ten level when he arrived. He could foul out in 10 minutes if we threw him out there. Very obvious, yet you jumped CCC for not playing him. The way Big Matt improved under James tutelage pretty much confirms that the staff had the right plan in place. I expect Gelo and KJ will take similar strides but don’t confuse that with be immediately ready to contribute this year. I fully expect you will be taking a victory lap with an “I told you so” when they do improve and misrepresent the way I and others feel about their future,

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

Serious question.

In your mind, is there any planning for anything other than perfect?
In November, can you come up with a plan if barnhizer gets re-injured?
Can you come up with a plan if Martinelli misses time?
Nicholson?
Leach?
Berry?

The answer is obviously YES.

So you are essentially advocating no contingency plans?

Its a different matter to say "We lost 2 starters, we aren't going to be as good." Nobody disputes that.
But do you really believe there is nothing a coach can do to lessen the impact of injuries?

Serious question.

In your mind, is there any planning for anything other than perfect?
In November, can you come up with a plan if barnhizer gets re-injured?
Can you come up with a plan if Martinelli misses time?
Nicholson?
Leach?
Berry?

The answer is obviously YES.

So you are essentially advocating no contingency plans?

Its a different matter to say "We lost 2 starters, we aren't going to be as good." Nobody disputes that.
But do you really believe there is nothing a coach can do to lessen the impact of injuries?

In basketball, it's unrealistic to spend your time planning for every possible injury scenario, especially when key players go down. The focus should be on developing all players to the best of their ability throughout the offseason. Make sure everyone is improving, sharpening their skills, and understanding the game at a high level. The offseason is were 90% of the development happens for players.

During the non-conference part of the season, the goal is to get your key players to develop chemistry and gel together as a team and get back into during season mentality.

When injuries inevitably occur, the mindset should be, “This is what you worked for all offseason, now is your time to step up.” It’s important to recognize that no amount of preparation in the offseason can truly account for the loss of top players. Your team’s identity will often revolve around your best 1-3 players, and if multiple stars go down, it’s incredibly challenging, even with solid preparation. You can’t prepare for losing your top players to long-term injuries, no one can. But examples like Pardon and Martinelli show how well players can rise to the occasion when given time to grow in a controlled environment during practice.

Throwing players into D1 competition before they’re ready isn’t ideal, coaching them up in practice allows them to develop and gain confidence, ensuring they’re ready for big opportunities when they arise. Learning to play within an offense where you can’t out athlete the competition and play within NU’s defensive system takes time. NU isn’t getting recruits who come in ready to star day 1. They have ups and downs and need time to get there like the majority of D1 players.

TLDR: You don’t plan for injuries, you just coach up your players to the best of their abilities, try to win the game in front of you, then hope someone steps up and is ready when injuries inevitably happen.

 

[AdamOnFirst]

At the start of the season, this team was realistically had the potential to be a solid bubble team, with a ceiling dependent on consistent performances from key players like Nick and Brooks. They needed heavy production from particularly Leach and Berry, who have recently been providing much needed shooting from deep to space the floor and create opportunities for the entire offense. As well as Leach ability to drive and create for others.

However, the freshman class hasn’t yet shown the skill level to log significant minutes on a tournament-caliber team. That’s not fair to expect that of them either. Combine that with preseason injuries, the loss of your two primary ball-handlers, and 3 players who missed essential offseason training, and it became clear this season would be an uphill battle.

The reality is that bench players rarely develop into reliable contributors during the regular season, especially not in the context of a tournament-caliber team. Development happens in the offseason, not in spot minutes during garbage time. Giving bench players 2 minutes a game doesn’t really help them develop at the level needed for postseason play. This team has relied heavily on the starting five, it needed to, and it’s a tough situation when you lose your best players, especially when you're down to 2 out of 3 top guys. The injuries have compounded the challenge, but the team's lack of depth has made it even harder to maintain any semblance of consistency.

In terms of getting the bench ready to contribute in such a short period, the task is daunting. Was Smith supposed to develop into a B1G level starter? Mullins has shown improvement, but did we expect him to make an even bigger jump? The tough reality is that bad luck and lack of depth aren’t a good combination for any program, especially in a highly competitive league like the Big Ten.

Looking ahead to next season, there's significant potential on the roster, but we’ll have to temper expectations. NU’s recruiting strategy often focuses on developmental players (out of necessity) who take 1-3 years to really adjust to the physicality and speed of the Big Ten. So, let’s not get overly worked up next season if the incoming freshmen’s minutes are limited or their production isn’t quite there right away. It’s a process, and patience will be key. I am looking forward to seeing more flashes from the current freshmen as this season continues and hope to see some of it realized next season. Martinelli is a baller and will continue to be fun to watch as well.

This is the correct framing, I think. A bubble team can't absorb the loss of their top players ever. The teams that can typically survive losing a couple of veterans for a time and be forced to mix Freshman into the mix are typically top 25 teams who just play like bubble teams while the injuries play out and return to elite status once their guys come back (or sneak in as a disappointing 7 seed if it's a season-ender). The Cats recruiting has gotten much better, but it's not like we've got the 86th and 99th recruit in the country sitting on the bench behind a Wooden finalist to come in and ball out either. Just the reality of it.

Last year's Cats team may be a good example. As many commented, If we don't lost Berry and Nicholson, NU is better than an 8/9 seed team and probably challenges to get into the 6 seed range, or higher with a BTN run. That's a team that had the juice to lose it's 3rd or 4th and 4th or 5th best player (and key inside defensive presence) and still be a legitimate 8 seed that wins its round of 64 game. You never know, maybe such a team is able to seed its way away from the Connecticut death star, score a minor upset in the second round, and enter the sweet 16 as a threat.

Anyway, that's the sort of team that can absorb a loss, and that wasn't a loss of Barnhizer. There is no way for this team to absorb his loss and remain on the bubble, simply put.

Let's see them go out, still win some games, challenge to make the Big Ten TOurnament, and still have a final record that isn't a total wreck. That's doable.

 

[Purple Pile Driver]

In basketball, it's unrealistic to spend your time planning for every possible injury scenario, especially when key players go down. The focus should be on developing all players to the best of their ability throughout the offseason. Make sure everyone is improving, sharpening their skills, and understanding the game at a high level. The offseason is were 90% of the development happens for players.

During the non-conference part of the season, the goal is to get your key players to develop chemistry and gel together as a team and get back into during season mentality.

When injuries inevitably occur, the mindset should be, “This is what you worked for all offseason, now is your time to step up.” It’s important to recognize that no amount of preparation in the offseason can truly account for the loss of top players. Your team’s identity will often revolve around your best 1-3 players, and if multiple stars go down, it’s incredibly challenging, even with solid preparation. You can’t prepare for losing your top players to long-term injuries, no one can. But examples like Pardon and Martinelli show how well players can rise to the occasion when given time to grow in a controlled environment during practice.

Throwing players into D1 competition before they’re ready isn’t ideal, coaching them up in practice allows them to develop and gain confidence, ensuring they’re ready for big opportunities when they arise. Learning to play within an offense where you can’t out athlete the competition and play within NU’s defensive system takes time. NU isn’t getting recruits who come in ready to star day 1. They have ups and downs and need time to get there like the majority of D1 players.

TLDR: You don’t plan for injuries, you just coach up your players to the best of their abilities, try to win the game in front of you, then hope someone steps up and is ready when injuries inevitably happen.

This should be obvious to fans. PWB just doesn’t like CCC. Another obvious observation.

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

This should be obvious to fans. PWB just doesn’t like CCC. Another obvious observation.

I feel like most of my posts are just long winded ways of stating the obvious.

 

[SDakaGordie]

Again, Gordie, you take a statement, distort it, and "argue" with it.
Its just so weak. Are you doing this intentionally?

Who would ever say "Lose on Purpose" to develop the freshman?

I know you can read, but your glasses probably need a reset.

People arguing with you is really out there, I know!

You do lose on purpose if you play less talented people intentionally more than needed. Can you not understand that?

 

[TheC]

Take a look at the tight nature of the games this season, and look at the level of depth. This team has less depth than the past two seasons, and that’s a major factor in their struggles. When your primary players (like Buie, Brooks, Audige, and Martinelli) are the ones orchestrating the offense, facilitating ball movement, or creating opportunities for others, it's incredibly difficult to get them off the floor without seeing a significant drop-off in production. The absence of reliable bench contributors who can step in and maintain a solid level of play is a problem.

In basketball, depth is a critical asset because the game is a series of runs. A few bad possessions or missed shots can quickly snowball into a double-digit deficit, especially if your top players are forced to sit for extended minutes. When you don't have capable substitutes who can hold the fort, you run the risk of losing momentum, which is often irrecoverable in the second half. A team without depth is vulnerable to those game-changing runs that can completely shift the dynamic of a contest when the starters are on the bench.

Looking at this team as well as past teams, who steps in to give the key players a breather while still maintaining a competitive level? That’s where the challenge lies. A lack of solid contributors off the bench means the starters are forced to play longer minutes. Often times a tired starter has been better than a fresh bench player. Better to get the rest in the 1st half when you have more time to recover from an opponent scoring run. There’s also a ton of tv timeouts and stops in action especially at the end of close games. Lots of time to get rest there.

I think those are all good points. I think I just get tired for them.

 

[SDakaGordie]

Again, Gordie, you take a statement, distort it, and "argue" with it.
Its just so weak. Are you doing this intentionally?

Who would ever say "Lose on Purpose" to develop the freshman?

I know you can read, but your glasses probably need a reset.

And please don’t call anything I offer as weak. It’s very sad to see you resort to that childish behavior.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

I don’t agree. If they happen to play well it sure as heck doesn’t mean they would have one month ago. Maybe they would have, maybe they wouldn’t, so it proves nothing to me. Maybe it does to you. Either way, you will get to blast CCC. So who is covering their bases. No agenda here at all.

I suspect you will accuse me an others that feel this way ( obviously there are more than just me) as be bandwagon jumpers when they play well down the line. Despite the fact, I have said they will be good players as they gain experience. Probably as early as next year.

It’s not about winning every discussion. It gets tiresome. Yet, you take every opportunity to criticize the limited use of the 2 Frosh without ever acknowledging they have played poorly on both ends of the court recently!

This same situation played out with Big Matt. He flat out wasn’t ready to play at a Big Ten level when he arrived. He could foul out in 10 minutes if we threw him out there. Very obvious, yet you jumped CCC for not playing him. The way Big Matt improved under James tutelage pretty much confirms that the staff had the right plan in place. I expect Gelo and KJ will take similar strides but don’t confuse that with be immediately ready to contribute this year. I fully expect you will be taking a victory lap with an “I told you so” when they do improve and misrepresent the way I and others feel about their future,

I feel like you have misrepresented many things in that post.
For one, I don't think I have blasted Collins this year, perhaps not at all.
Of course, an occasional criticism is warranted. What a boring place this board would be if we were all lifetime members of the Church of Collins.
Somewhere along the way you lost your sense of fairness this year. Not on players. You make valid criticisms and compliments about players. I'm talking about your comments about Collins. And me.

 

[loyolacat]

This is a long standing complaint of mine. I am a CC fan but just do not think he develops the team for the long run in a gruesome B10 schedule. And of course you develop players in the off season but you dont develop confidence to perform until ya done it....and of course not doing it is part of getting to being able to do it. And if you feel like you have successfully developed them in the summer why would you not play them during the season? unless you have made the evaluation that they are just not good enough.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

Anyway, that's the sort of team that can absorb a loss, and that wasn't a loss of Barnhizer. There is no way for this team to absorb his loss and remain on the bubble, simply put.

We had fallen off the bubble before Barney was shut down.
But he had been playing hurt and his performance was not near his best - so in effect he wasn't the same player. As Collins said, it happened during the MSU loss, when Barnhizer looked out of sorts physically.

Obviously, I'm one of the many who thought Collins was probably playing Barnhizer too many meaningless minutes for a guy coming off an injury. I did give the coach the benefit of the doubt, saying all head coaches have to evaluate the tradeoff between keeping the computer ratings healthy, developing the young guys and keeping the roster healthy. Ultimately, they are the ones on the hook for how their decisions play out. This is a nod to the "you make your own luck" school of thought. You can't say Collins was directly responsible, but it certainly makes sense to say he is partly responsible for where the roster stands today.

I thought that coming into the season and I think it even more now.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

This should be obvious to fans. PWB just doesn’t like CCC. Another obvious observation.

Why write that?
You used to do that, then you (thankfully) stopped.
Now that we're losing, you're lashing out again.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

People arguing with you is really out there, I know!

You do lose on purpose if you play less talented people intentionally more than needed. Can you not understand that?

No, its totally illogical and nobody ever said that.
Nobody wants Collins to try to lose games by playing the less-experienced players.
You play the freshmen and transfers so that they get game experience, some film to watch and help them to improve. You do that in games you are winning fairly easily.

Some people think playing the starters for 38 minutes is
a) a missed opportunity to develop your bench and
b) unnecessary health demands/risks for the starters

Thats my belief. Same as ever. Has nothing to do with Collins, except he's our coach.