- Messages
- 142
- Likes
- 315
Max could have sat indian style anywhere on the field and I wouldn't have complained about him being in the lineup. Your point of Offense makes up for defense is valid
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome to The Platinum Board. We are a Nebraska Husker news source and fan community.
Sign Up Now!They actually have to be good at offense though. Trotting Swanson out there the past 2 years and expecting him to be anything other than terrible was insane.Max could have sat indian style anywhere on the field and I wouldn't have complained about him being in the lineup. Your point of Offense makes up for defense is valid
You can’t be on here saying our defense is good while also agreeing 5/9 spots are below average, that’s not how it works.
Not a reason we won games either (we didn’t win very many)I didn't say 5 of 9. FFS, there aren't even 9 defensive spots in the discussion. Defense isn't why Nebraska struggled during a stretch in 2025. My goodness.
Nope, they're not but it's all we have. @...TrueColors... mentioned a year or so ago it'd be nice to have some data like MLB. But holy heck the investment would be off the charts. Advanced defensive analytics for college is somewhat ridiculous too. Judging amateurs (- NIL) to perform at the level of professionals isn't really fair to anyone and that's exactly what the highly advanced analytics will do.
Yep, Swanny wasn't a good OF'er. Value his offensive production vs defensive liability and purely a guess, his offense offset the defense? I'm aware of the next level, understand it and agree with you.
MLB has 30 teams. D1 has 300 teams. The standards have to be different. It's unrealistic to expect the same.
Analytics is really good for the game, up to a certain point. But honestly, in a 56-game schedule; FIP, xFIP, UZR, DRS, etc, etc would drive a lot of people in the game nuts. And I don't think it's needed, or warranted. AA works much better over a 162-game schedule with the best ball players in the world. Which college athletes aren't.
no but your reliance on fielding percentage being top 50 etc cant hold water when the guy with the best fielding percentage is Swanny.
you disproved your own statement.
My point is a great fielding percentage doesn't automatically make a great defense and you know this.
Not a reason we won games either (we didn’t win very many)
Yep, Swanny wasn't a good OF'er.
He won several games by himselfNot a reason we won games either (we didn’t win very many)
I can definitely see your point here.
Would I be able to sell you on the idea that advanced analytics would mean something in college. But only after about 4-5 years of data collection.
That make a difference?
The MLB data is worth a lot because we’ve got decades and in some cases centuries of it.
In English, right away.
I can verify this.Absolutely it will, to an extent. I'm a big analytical guy, but not so much of the advanced stuff for college as I feel it can negatively impact the game with not just the 56-game schedule but also over-reliability and more importantly - the NCAA restrictions of coaches time allowed with the team per week.
Find an assistant like Marcuzzo and my opinion will slightly change.
I'd rather the money go in to as-is resources to benefit the players. We have a lab that can take our pitching up a level, hitting can get a bump top, but we rarely, if ever, use it. Part of that is NU Athletics related with limited access. Part of it is not having dedicated people to use it correctly, so on and so on. Pay a pair of guys $60,000 each per year to solely focus on this and you'll see improvements. But, that's too much to ask for.
MLB/MiLB guys don't have school (required attendance + homework) to sweat, it's 110% baseball focused over a 7-8 month period including ST. And zero time restrictions. They also have "data coaches", which solely focus on that and a front office with nerds pumping the information to those dedicated coaches.
@HuskerBaseball can likely verify this. I was told by a former parent, we have a current pitcher (please keep his name out of this discussion) that went and visited with a specialist. In the very first or second visit, he diagnosed something that should be corrected. This specialist hasn't way less access to this player, no more access to analytical data than Rob Childress has and Rob never once mentioned this. I don't know if it's analytical or fundamentally related but the point is - our T5 pitching coach couldn't identify something that seemed minor but very beneficial.
Absolutely it will, to an extent. I'm a big analytical guy, but not so much of the advanced stuff for college as I feel it can negatively impact the game with not just the 56-game schedule but also over-reliability and more importantly - the NCAA restrictions of coaches time allowed with the team per week.
Find an assistant like Marcuzzo and my opinion will slightly change.
I'd rather the money go in to as-is resources to benefit the players. We have a lab that can take our pitching up a level, hitting can get a bump top, but we rarely, if ever, use it. Part of that is NU Athletics related with limited access. Part of it is not having dedicated people to use it correctly, so on and so on. Pay a pair of guys $60,000 each per year to solely focus on this and you'll see improvements. But, that's too much to ask for.
MLB/MiLB guys don't have school (required attendance + homework) to sweat, it's 110% baseball focused over a 7-8 month period including ST. And zero time restrictions. They also have "data coaches", which solely focus on that and a front office with nerds pumping the information to those dedicated coaches.
@HuskerBaseball can likely verify this. I was told by a former parent, we have a current pitcher (please keep his name out of this discussion) that went and visited with a specialist. In the very first or second visit, he diagnosed something that should be corrected. This specialist hasn't way less access to this player, no more access to analytical data than Rob Childress has and Rob never once mentioned this. I don't know if it's analytical or fundamentally related but the point is - our T5 pitching coach couldn't identify something that seemed minor but very beneficial.
Ah yes an early season game that didn’t matter. You could’ve atleast used the Big 10 tourney 2 years ago for your argument, even though he didn’t do anything in Stillwater once we got to regionals.The 2025 Vandy game alone laughs at the above.
Swanny's offense benefited NU more than balls not caught in his career in Lincoln, including 2025.