UCLA

[Hungry Jack]

They are far from a finished product, but there is not a team that I have seen that defends as aggressively and athletically as they do. We were able to handle their press, but they destroyed us on the boards, and did not give up anything easy inside. I can’t remember the time we had so many of our shots blocked.

Too bad we could not pull it out last night. We damn near did. We are the best seven win team in the conference.

 

[TheC]

They are far from a finished product, but there is not a team that I have seen that defends as aggressively and athletically as they do. We were able to handle their press, but they destroyed us on the boards, and did not give up anything easy inside. I can’t remember the time we had so many of our shots blocked.

Too bad we could not pull it out last night. We damn near did. We are the best seven win team in the conference.

From what I've seen, the two best teams in the league are Michigan State and UCLA. We'll see where Maryland is at this weekend, but I agree that UCLA team is very strong.

 

[GatoLouco]

I agree, they are "frantic". They are also a good example of what is often mentioned on this board as an athleticism disparity between us and opponents. Which is, IMO, exageratted in most cases, but not against UCLA. They are not just aggressive, they are quick as hell.

But here's a list of other teams that I see having no athleticism edge over us. Understanding athleticism as speed, strenght or just abnormal size advantages (more or less ranked from best to worst teams):

• Wisconsin
• Purdue
• Indiana
• Ohio State
• Minnesota
• Nebraska
• Iowa
• Penn State
• Washinston

I am not saying some might not have an edge, but it's, IMO, negligible. The remaining teams I think do have an edge, when it's not speed, it can be size, like Michigan.

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

I agree, they are "frantic". They are also a good example of what is often mentioned on this board as an athleticism disparity between us and opponents. Which is, IMO, exageratted in most cases, but not against UCLA. They are not just aggressive, they are quick as hell.

But here's a list of other teams that I see having no athleticism edge over us. Understanding athleticism as speed, strenght or just abnormal size advantages (more or less ranked from best to worst teams):

• Wisconsin
• Purdue
• Indiana
• Ohio State
• Minnesota
• Nebraska
• Iowa
• Penn State
• Washinston

I am not saying some might not have an edge, but it's, IMO, negligible. The remaining teams I think do have an edge, when it's not speed, it can be size, like Michigan.

If we count natural basketball skill (touch, shooting, touch, etc.) as talent, the list is very similar. Wisconsin and Purdue get taken off the list and add USC. If NU was fully healthy they’d have an edge over quite a few of these teams.

IMO MSU and UCLA are the two most talented teams in the B1G. They both play very good defense with athletes on the court and bench.

 

[GatoLouco]

IMO MSU and UCLA are the two most talented teams in the B1G. They both play very good defense with athletes on the court and bench.

It kind of depends on what "talent" is. If it's at the moment, without mulling it over much, I agree. If it's raw potential, I think IL is #1 talent wise.

 

[Hungry Jack]

I agree, they are "frantic". They are also a good example of what is often mentioned on this board as an athleticism disparity between us and opponents. Which is, IMO, exageratted in most cases, but not against UCLA. They are not just aggressive, they are quick as hell.

But here's a list of other teams that I see having no athleticism edge over us. Understanding athleticism as speed, strenght or just abnormal size advantages (more or less ranked from best to worst teams):

• Wisconsin
• Purdue
• Indiana
• Ohio State
• Minnesota
• Nebraska
• Iowa
• Penn State
• Washinston

I am not saying some might not have an edge, but it's, IMO, negligible. The remaining teams I think do have an edge, when it's not speed, it can be size, like Michigan.

This incoming class won't hurt us in this regard. I think it has decent athleticism, though no one really jumps out. Bennerman is intriguing, especially when you imagine him putting on 20-30 pounds of muscle. Here is a recent tape that shows him doing some pretty athletic big man things:

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

It kind of depends on what "talent" is. If it's at the moment, without mulling it over much, I agree. If it's raw potential, I think IL is #1 talent wise.

I might be bullish on States potential with Richardson, Fears, and Booker. Seen them in person a few times this season. A lot of Young talent on the roster.

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

This incoming class won't hurt us in this regard. I think it has decent athleticism, though no one really jumps out. Bennerman is intriguing, especially when you imagine him putting on 20-30 pounds of muscle. Here is a recent tape that shows him doing some pretty athletic big man things:

View embedded media

Developmental high potential prospect. Not the same type of player but like same type recruit as Nance. Probably will need 2-3 years to really hit their stride but the ceiling is very high. I like this get a lot. I hope the board is patient with this class.

 

[GatoLouco]

Playing a team as active as UCLA is a pain in the ass. But it can also be exploited. I did not watch Minesotta playing them, but I can see how UCLA would lose against them, even not being a night where everything goes well for one side and not for the other.

When a team is that aggressive you need, IMO, two things:
1) Very good levels of concentration
2) Stamina, because #1 will fall apart if you get too tired, hard to stay concentrated

These teams will overplay passing lanes, will go for deflections, steals, will get overly close to defenders. That creates opportunities for beating them on cuts, for beating them off the dribble when receiving a pass, etc. It's not uncommon to see open layups against teams like this. It's a consequence of the aggressiveness, it is risky.

 

[ThatkidfromHolland]

Playing a team as active as UCLA is a pain in the ass. But it can also be exploited. I did not watch Minesotta playing them, but I can see how UCLA would lose against them, even not being a night where everything goes well for one side and not for the other.

When a team is that aggressive you need, IMO, two things:
1) Very good levels of concentration
2) Stamina, because #1 will fall apart if you get too tired, hard to stay concentrated

These teams will overplay passing lanes, will go for deflections, steals, will get overly close to defenders. That creates opportunities for beating them on cuts, for beating them off the dribble when receiving a pass, etc. It's not uncommon to see open layups against teams like this. It's a consequence of the aggressiveness, it is risky.

Matt at the end of the 1st half exhibit A.

 

[Hungry Jack]

Here is Jake West scoring 30 a few weeks ago. Physically, he has work to do, but he looks further along than he was over the summer.

Not a lot of defense in this game, but West strikes me as a guy who could be like one of those 3-making metronomes from Iowa, with better ball handling skills.

 

[TheC]

Here is Jake West scoring 30 a few weeks ago. Physically, he has work to do, but he looks further along than he was over the summer.

Not a lot of defense in this game, but West strikes me as a guy who could be like one of those 3-making metronomes from Iowa, with better ball handling skills.

View embedded media

J-A-A-A-A-A-KE West!!

He has a pretty stroke and the ability to beat his man off the dribble. Can he figure out how to finish in the lane against the BIG bigs like Boo did will be the question. Sure seems like he has three-level scoring potential!

 

[JoeWildcat]

Playing a team as active as UCLA is a pain in the ass. But it can also be exploited. I did not watch Minesotta playing them, but I can see how UCLA would lose against them, even not being a night where everything goes well for one side and not for the other.

When a team is that aggressive you need, IMO, two things:
1) Very good levels of concentration
2) Stamina, because #1 will fall apart if you get too tired, hard to stay concentrated

These teams will overplay passing lanes, will go for deflections, steals, will get overly close to defenders. That creates opportunities for beating them on cuts, for beating them off the dribble when receiving a pass, etc. It's not uncommon to see open layups against teams like this. It's a consequence of the aggressiveness, it is risky.

And 3) Referees who will call fouls when they hack your wrists and forearms.

 

[Hungry Jack]

J-A-A-A-A-A-KE West!!

He has a pretty stroke and the ability to beat his man off the dribble. Can he figure out how to finish in the lane against the BIG bigs like Boo did will be the question. Sure seems like he has three-level scoring potential!

He’s not as quick and fast as Boo. But he looks like a guy who could hurt a defense from outside.

 

[Jonny2TheP]

They are far from a finished product, but there is not a team that I have seen that defends as aggressively and athletically as they do. We were able to handle their press, but they destroyed us on the boards, and did not give up anything easy inside. I can’t remember the time we had so many of our shots blocked.

Too bad we could not pull it out last night. We damn near did. We are the best seven win team in the conference.

Yeah, I was texting with some other NU fans last night and commented that it was an extremely hard fought game. Both teams played really hard and it made for a fun watch. Obviously, the big second half run by UCLA and the last second no call made for a tougher watching experience, but the first 30 minutes or so of that game was really enjoyable.

Neither team was low on energy or effort. Tough ending, but for the most part, that was a hard fought battle that I really enjoyed.

 

[loyolacat]

Basketball is a great game....so many ways to win (and lose). Athleticism is great for creating space, doesnt work flat out..quickness probably more important than speed. One way or another you have to have a space creator to get decent % shot. Last year Boo created a lot of good % shots with his quickness and IQ...This year more difficult with less quickness...went to creating space with Matt N and his picks using his size, the overall spacing of the offense and Martinelli who could fake it till he made it...My favorite space creator was Pete Carril and that old Princeton offense....like watching a magic show...and of course Carmody which showed the limits of style vs athleticism in creating space... All that being said I think this was CCs best coaching job...he found ways even with moderate space creators and new inexperienced kids....did a good job when he didnt get jobbed by the officials...and I agree with sooo many , this was a team that earned our respect.

 

[Davidgolds5]

He’s not as quick and fast as Boo. But he looks like a guy who could hurt a defense from outside.

I pulled up some highlights of west as well. He looks like he is very confident. Could care less about social media, but if he attracts people to the cats, that’s never a bad thing. Let’s hope he is a good one.