NU vs EIU Game Thread

[Hungry Jack]

As an offensive threat, Big Matt is Ozymandias ("Look upon my hands, ye fans, and despair). But his defensive value is unassailable. I was a bit surprised that EIU's big Argentine guy got off a few shots on him, but Matt was a real presence on D. EIU's speed really flummoxed our perimeter defense, but the paint was well protected when Matt was in.

No real secret why the OT rotation was Matt, Mullins, Gelo, Mart and Leach. That was a defense-first lineup.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

Does KenPom and the like distinguish between a 9-point win in OT vs. regulation? Genuinely don’t know.

Thought Cappy might respond about KenPom, because he didn't, so here's my take...

For Ken Pom (and Bart Torvik) an overtime game is essentially a game with more possessions. Ken Pom is all about points scored and allowed per possession. He determines "pace" by measuring possessions vs time played.

Just as a note of comparison, when I created my own ratings, one of many things I did was reduce the margin of victory by half if the game went into OT. If It went to double OT, I reduced the margin of victory by 75%. Clunky but realistic.

As for the impact of the game on our rating, the 9 point win is definitely better than a 1 point win. But if all the good teams in the Big Ten are beating Eastern Illinois by 30, it will still cost us maybe 5 spots in KenPom's ranking at tournament time.

Unless he has modified his method, a 1 point loss is basically the same as a 1 point win. (no giggling).

 

[CatJones]

Nick struggled tonight.

Nick "struggled" because they collapsed around him when he got the ball in the paint. I think we will see this frequently in the future.

 

[DaCat]

Not sure how some people gush about how great our coaching staff is "developing our bigs" and others put all the blame on the individual player for not being able to do some basic, fundamental things.

It can't be both.

It can.

 

[Arlcatsfan]

Nick "struggled" because they collapsed around him when he got the ball in the paint. I think we will see this frequently in the future.

Getting Brooks back hopefully soon and having Ty getting his stroke back will help against that kind of D. Make the defense pay when they collapse like that will keep them honest. We missed quite a few 3's last night. Jalen knocking down some 3's will also give the opposing defense something to game plan about.

 

[SDakaGordie]

Weird game all around for Nicholson. There was a 5 minutes stretch when he looked like trash. But he played really well much of the game. Played the full overtime, I think.

Not sure how some people gush about how great our coaching staff is "developing our bigs" and others put all the blame on the individual player for not being able to do some basic, fundamental things.

It can't be both.

I believe it can, with the much larger responsibility on the player himself to develop his individual offensive game. A head coach’s / leader’s role is to put guys in position to succeed. An assistant’s is largely to fill in where the head coach cannot do everything. We can list all of these many duties and responsibilities they both have, but think it’s very far down on the list that they are teaching someone how to dribble, catch and/or shoot a ball better. Boo Buie developed into a great player by a long and hard road of individual physical, mental and technical self-improvement all within a series of schemes that he learned over time from his coaches.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

It can.

nope. wrong.

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

Weird game all around for Nicholson. There was a 5 minutes stretch when he looked like trash. But he played really well much of the game. Played the full overtime, I think.

Not sure how some people gush about how great our coaching staff is "developing our bigs" and others put all the blame on the individual player for not being able to do some basic, fundamental things.

It can't be both.

If you look at where Nicholson started as a freshman compared to where he is now, that’s the definition of development. You can’t just teach "touch" around the basket at the college level. Touch is something that’s developed from a young age, with a little bit of natural ability mixed in. There’s only so much you can teach a player who doesn’t have that natural feel for finishing in tight spaces.

Now, if Nicholson had the ability to score in traffic like some players, trust me, they’d be using that every chance they get against competition like last night. But every player has limitations, and as a coach the job is to find ways to get the most out of players despite those limitations. And that's where I give Nicholson and the coaching staff credit. He's about as sound a player as he can be, considering what he has to work with. That’s a credit to both Matt and the staff. Matt has developed into a really solid player, and his improvement has been no accident.

He’s incredibly smart. He worked on his passing, on his spacing; he adapted his game to compensate for what he couldn’t do. On top of that, he’s the anchor defensively, which is the foundation for everything else NU does as a team. So, he’s been a huge part of the success.

Development in the end is mostly on the player. It’s the player's work, their mentality but, when you see repeated examples of players improving consistently, you can see that the coaches have created an environment where that development comes easy. And this staff, make no mistake, does a fantastic job of developing players.

TLDR: It can.

 

[GatoLouco]

Weird game all around for Nicholson. There was a 5 minutes stretch when he looked like trash. But he played really well much of the game. Played the full overtime, I think.

Not sure how some people gush about how great our coaching staff is "developing our bigs" and others put all the blame on the individual player for not being able to do some basic, fundamental things.

It can't be both.

The explanation for that is Dererk Pardon. He turned out better than I think most anticipated, so the idea we are somehow great developing bigs was born.

Benson? Meh

Nance? Could not play big

Young? Got stapled to the bench

Nicholson?

That is not to say we are not competent at developing our bigs. But I don’t know that we are better or worse than with any other position.

Want a counter? The 🐐. Bam. We are great at developing guards.

 

[SDakaGordie]

The explanation for that is Dererk Pardon. He turned out better than I think most anticipated, so the idea we are somehow great developing bigs was born.

Benson? Meh

Nance? Could not play big

Young? Got stapled to the bench

Nicholson?

That is not to say we are not competent at developing our bigs. But I don’t know that we are better or worse than with any other position.

Want a counter? The 🐐. Bam. We are great at developing guards.

Nance and Young transferring to blue bloods certainly doesn’t hurt the argument that we can develop bigs.

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

The explanation for that is Dererk Pardon. He turned out better than I think most anticipated, so the idea we are somehow great developing bigs was born.

Benson? Meh

Nance? Could not play big

Young? Got stapled to the bench

Nicholson?

That is not to say we are not competent at developing our bigs. But I don’t know that we are better or worse than with any other position.

Want a counter? The 🐐. Bam. We are great at developing guards.

Here is in my opinion some bigs that developed well at NU. It’s not just about the finished product but where they started and how far they went. (Leaving my thoughts on Nance out to not derail this further)

1. Alex Olah
Olah was never the most athletic guy, but he got stronger over time, expanded his shooting range, and really worked on his zone defense skills. Sure, his mobility wasn’t top-tier, but with his size, he learned how to block shots, alter plays, and be a force in the paint. With McIntosh at point, Olah turned into a solid pick-and-pop guy, using his smarts to make the right plays. He wasn't the most aggressive, but he was certainly a product of hard work and coachable attitude. Big time development there.

2. Derek Pardon
Pardon’s the guy who came in with the most raw potential, no question. This kid had hops and a soft touch around the basket. Each year, he got better on both ends. He worked hard on defense, becoming more dependable in the post, and helped anchor that team during their NCAA run. His height might’ve held him back a little, and he wasn’t the best shooter, but man, he played above his limitations. His progress was the result of relentless work and a commitment to improving his weaknesses.

3. Ryan Young
Young is a textbook example of a guy who maximized what he had. When he came in, he was redshirted, and people had questions about his size and athleticism. But you know what? He developed one of the best footwork games around the basket, and his soft touch made him a reliable scorer. He wasn’t the most gifted physically, but he made up for it with positioning, timing, and smarts. A great example of a guy who doesn’t let limitations define his career.

4. Nicholson
(See prior post)

In sum, what this staff has done is nothing short of impressive. They took players with different strengths and weaknesses and helped them reach their potential to varying degrees. But don’t forget, credit goes to the players too, they put in the work. Hard work, smart development, and maximizing your assets, that’s how you improve.

These guys all came in with different starting points, but the one with the highest ceiling from day one was Derek Pardon. He had the most natural talent, and as he developed, he became the most impactful. But that’s what coaching is all about, getting the most out of each player, regardless of where they start. It’s not just about their raw abilities; it’s about creating an environment where they can work through their limitations and grow. And I think the coaching staff has done a tremendous job setting that up, providing the structure and support these guys needed to reach their potential. Each player showed real progress, and that’s a direct result of the work done both by the staff and the players themselves. You have to work with what you have. A lot of the guards have had better starting points than a lot of the bigs listed above.

 

[PurpleWhiteBoy]

I believe it can, with the much larger responsibility on the player himself to develop his individual offensive game. A head coach’s / leader’s role is to put guys in position to succeed. An assistant’s is largely to fill in where the head coach cannot do everything. We can list all of these many duties and responsibilities they both have, but think it’s very far down on the list that they are teaching someone how to dribble, catch and/or shoot a ball better. Boo Buie developed into a great player by a long and hard road of individual physical, mental and technical self-improvement all within a series of schemes that he learned over time from his coaches.

I think our guards and wings are coached very meticulously, on both ends of the floor. Collins spoke midseason two years ago of getting Ty Berry "back in the lab" to work on his shooting mechanics. And last season it paid off. Martinelli has clearly worked on (and been coached on) his outside shot. Same with Barnhizer. Buie got great coaching on how to get into the paint and his "floater" was developed into a major weapon. It takes individual commitment AND coaching. Some guys just have special talents that aren't really taught - like Martinelli with his footwork and inside moves... (and before him Ryan Young, who was similar on offense but lacked Martinelli's arsenal)

Our defensive positioning and technique improved across the board after Chris Lowery was brought in. This year the athletically-gifted Mullins appears to have been "coached up" as a gifted defender. We don't have a good frame of reference for Barnhizer or Nicholson, but Matt's defensive technique has certainly improved from where he was "day 1" three years ago when he started playing. Unfortunately, not much at all for Matt on the other end of the floor. And If you watch his positioning (and effort) on rebounds - he relies heavily on his height and doesn't use his body at all to get into advantageous position. That requires coaching and desire. He had 12 boards last night, but that just seems like an outlier. To me that is the fault of Nicholson and the coaching staff.

Matt is a damned good screener. He has been coached on that - its impossible to be that good at it without the coaches focusing on it and teaching him. If you watch replays of our guys getting to the basket, Nicholson is often walling off the help defender, clearing a path for our guy to score. His well-timed screens on the perimeter create a bunch of open looks. This is what big guys are created to do - from a guard's perspective. Set me a good screen and get me an open look. For two years our coaching staff was three offense-minded guards, one defensive wizard guard and a retiree who schemes up crucial plays. Not exactly a recipe for low post scoring - but our guard play excelled.

I just won't accept this notion that everything a player does poorly is his fault and everything he does well is due to great coaching and a little talent. It can't be that way. It requires the belief that the players are deliberately ignoring the great teaching they're receiving. Its far more logical to recognize that the coaches emphasize (and have expertise in) specific areas - and that our players develop accordingly. Look at Matt Painter and his "big man specialist" Brandon Brantley, a 6'8" former player who won the 2nd annual Big Ten Assistant Coach of the Year. As with NU's Chris Lowery, the expertise is pretty obvious.

If Nicholson ever posts up in the paint and the ball goes into him, I may faint.

Edit - Several people posted while I was typing my assessment, it was really directed to Gordie and DaCat. I always appreciate reading the comments from folks like ThatKidFromHolland and Gato, who know their basketball, even if we disagree sometimes. Not sure how Chris Collins could take credit for Alex Olah, though. Carmody recruit, Tavaras Hardy development. And Ryan Young was essentially the same player when he was redshirted as the guy who went to Duke, other than learning how to set screens outside.

 

[freewillie07]

Leach hit a great shot at the end of the first half, made the huge three near the end of regulation, and he took over overtime. Yeah, Boo would have been proud.

It's nice to learn lessons in wins. The Cats were terrible in the second half, and they never really got going from the field the whole game. They learned they can't just show up and win against teams like this or Chicago State.

Also, if NU got cute in holding out Barnhizer one more game because it was expected to be a laugher, I sure hope they're done with that. I hope he's playing Tuesday. Tired of hearing how close he is.

I don’t think NU was being “cute” holding Brooks out. I think they rightfully saw this as a very winnable game and weighed the pros and cons and figured another four days of rest would be better for Brooks. Bring him back for a tune-up (Montana St. went to Wisconsin and lost by 12… not awful) before things start to ramp up into Big Ten play.

 

[SmellyCat]

I don’t think NU was being “cute” holding Brooks out. I think they rightfully saw this as a very winnable game and weighed the pros and cons and figured another four days of rest would be better for Brooks. Bring him back for a tune-up (Montana St. went to Wisconsin and lost by 12… not awful) before things start to ramp up into Big Ten play.

Nah, I don't think so either, but it happens occasionally, and I was just saying that BB being out of the game almost cost NU in this one.

 

[SDakaGordie]

You offer a lot of good observations here, but the point to be debated is whether Matt’s lack of offense is on him or the coaches.

Let’s look at it from a different perspective- economics and scarce resources (which we certainly have at NU, where players must go to class). Matt can’t do some very basic offensive things while others can. Who would you choose to spend most of your offensive preparation time on if you were coach? It’s an easy answer.

Who knows what’s been tried by the coaches (or the retiree, since you don’t dignify him as a coach), but it seems to me they’ve leveraged the talents (and minimized the weaknesses) of these kids in their best possible manner for the benefit of the team.

 

[olshin]

Such an enigma. Certainly does some things at a level that we just can't effectively replace. Overall, he's absolutely a positive when he's out there on the court.

But the failure to develop any sort of functional scoring ability ... doesn't speak well on our coaching or the player really.

 

[techtim72]

My sense of the game from 20k feet is that NU wanted to either make 3 point shots or score from the paint. It seemed like the players looked primarily to Ty to shoot the 3 and when he wasn't scoring the entire offense went sideways. EIU on the other hand, when their 3 point shots weren't falling, were content to take 2 point mid-range shots. This kept them in the game and established an offensive rhythm.

Barnhizer will make an incredible difference to the offense, giving NU another weapon.

 

[GatoLouco]

Here is in my opinion some bigs that developed well at NU. It’s not just about the finished product but where they started and how far they went. (Leaving my thoughts on Nance out to not derail this further)

1. Alex Olah
Olah was never the most athletic guy, but he got stronger over time, expanded his shooting range, and really worked on his zone defense skills. Sure, his mobility wasn’t top-tier, but with his size, he learned how to block shots, alter plays, and be a force in the paint. With McIntosh at point, Olah turned into a solid pick-and-pop guy, using his smarts to make the right plays. He wasn't the most aggressive, but he was certainly a product of hard work and coachable attitude. Big time development there.

2. Derek Pardon
Pardon’s the guy who came in with the most raw potential, no question. This kid had hops and a soft touch around the basket. Each year, he got better on both ends. He worked hard on defense, becoming more dependable in the post, and helped anchor that team during their NCAA run. His height might’ve held him back a little, and he wasn’t the best shooter, but man, he played above his limitations. His progress was the result of relentless work and a commitment to improving his weaknesses.

3. Ryan Young
Young is a textbook example of a guy who maximized what he had. When he came in, he was redshirted, and people had questions about his size and athleticism. But you know what? He developed one of the best footwork games around the basket, and his soft touch made him a reliable scorer. He wasn’t the most gifted physically, but he made up for it with positioning, timing, and smarts. A great example of a guy who doesn’t let limitations define his career.

4. Nicholson
(See prior post)

In sum, what this staff has done is nothing short of impressive. They took players with different strengths and weaknesses and helped them reach their potential to varying degrees. But don’t forget, credit goes to the players too, they put in the work. Hard work, smart development, and maximizing your assets, that’s how you improve.

These guys all came in with different starting points, but the one with the highest ceiling from day one was Derek Pardon. He had the most natural talent, and as he developed, he became the most impactful. But that’s what coaching is all about, getting the most out of each player, regardless of where they start. It’s not just about their raw abilities; it’s about creating an environment where they can work through their limitations and grow. And I think the coaching staff has done a tremendous job setting that up, providing the structure and support these guys needed to reach their potential. Each player showed real progress, and that’s a direct result of the work done both by the staff and the players themselves. You have to work with what you have. A lot of the guards have had better starting points than a lot of the bigs listed above.

The only thing you wrote I kind of not agree with is regarding Ryan Young. I did not see the progression you speak of. I saw his footwork and craftiness being there very early on. I had forgotten about Olah.

Anyway, the issue is not so much if players developed. You expect every player to develop. The issue is whether they develop more or less than expected. Which is, of couse, very debatable and a matter of opinion. I personally think we do a fairly good job developing players, just don't see us being better or worse in any given position.

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

The only thing you wrote I kind of not agree with is regarding Ryan Young. I did not see the progression you speak of. I saw his footwork and craftiness being there very early on. I had forgotten about Olah.

Anyway, the issue is not so much if players developed. You expect every player to develop. The issue is whether they develop more or less than expected. Which is, of couse, very debatable and a matter of opinion. I personally think we do a fairly good job developing players, just don't see us being better or worse in any given position.

Young definitely showed it early on. I just think it got noticeably better. He wasn’t recruited by a blueblood like Duke straight out of high school, but he earned a transfer and got minutes there. That shows some development in my opinion.

I would agree in that I don’t see NU better at developing one position over another. The guards we brought in just had higher ceilings, more raw potential, and that’s why it might seem like to some that they’ve developed better. But when I look at guys like Nicholson and Young, people can’t deny that they tapped into almost every ounce of their natural talent. That right there is a sign of really good development from the staff.

PWB: Yeah, Olah was brought in by someone else, but he was primarily developed by CCC and the staff here. Doesn’t matter who recruited him when he stepped on the floor, it was CCC’s coaching staff that made him what he became. If you want to argue about who gets the credit for development as far as assistants vs HC, sure, but at the end of the day, that’s on CCC. He picks his staff, and they’re a reflection of his choices. Overall, I think CCC’s done a solid job with his staff, aside from one guy, but that’s part of the game.

 

[NJCat]

I tried to record the game on Peacock but could only access a feature called “Key Plays,” which is the most laughably bad feature I have ever seen. In 28 “key plays,” I saw about three baskets scored and no indication how the game even ended. The snippets seemed totally random. What a god-awful service.

Peacock has the game available as a replay. In fact, the replay cuts out all the commercials so you don't have to FF them, but does include the halftime show. I watched the replay and it was great. Just wanted to make sure you knew for future Peacock games.

 

[SmellyCat]

Peacock has the game available as a replay. In fact, the replay cuts out all the commercials so you don't have to FF them, but does include the halftime show. I watched the replay and it was great. Just wanted to make sure you knew for future Peacock games.

That sounds pretty great (second-half collapse notwithstanding). I can't vouch for the key plays, but I loved the studio stuff for the first Peacock game, when the studio treated the game like the most important game of the night.

 

[clarificationcat]

Weird game all around for Nicholson. There was a 5 minutes stretch when he looked like trash. But he played really well much of the game. Played the full overtime, I think.

Not sure how some people gush about how great our coaching staff is "developing our bigs" and others put all the blame on the individual player for not being able to do some basic, fundamental things.

It can't be both.

I don’t know if that is fair in this case. Matt is pretty unique. I honestly can’t recall seeing anyone with his size and athleticism be so inept under the basket. This is his fifth season. It’s not rocket science. He played with Ryan Young for 2 seasons. He has no moves under the basket, not even a pump fake. I think the post issues primarily fall on him. But not for lack of effort. He’s a very valuable member of 2 tourney teams and developed himself into a very good defender and pick and roll option.

Having said that, I don’t think Collins has necessarily been great at developing big men. We’ve had a few bigs who could play with their back to the basket but not many. Pete tried but that was never his strength. Hunger has some decent footwork and a nice touch but seems too rushed and unathletic at times to be consistently effective.