Nance NIL
- Thread starter GatoLouco
- Start date
It will be great for the message board when...
Pete Nance has a great year at the stretch 4 and his team wins the national championship...
and some folks on this board are vehemently arguing that this "proves" how great Coach Collins is at developing his players
while another group is vehemently arguing that this shows how inept Chris Collins is when it comes to using his roster.
Fun times ahead!
Pete Nance has a great year at the stretch 4 and his team wins the national championship...
and some folks on this board are vehemently arguing that this "proves" how great Coach Collins is at developing his players
while another group is vehemently arguing that this shows how inept Chris Collins is when it comes to using his roster.
Fun times ahead!
Meh, Pete's team should have a great season and he'll be in a position to profit from it greatly just like the kid who transferred to Indiana last year, but I'm gonna guess that Pete will do more with the opportunity.
The Athletic ran a piece today about the top 20 big men in college hoops this season. I guess you need to put Pete in the "Collins developed a player" category as Pete checks in at #15:
15. Pete Nance | 6-10 stretch-big | North Carolina
I’m a huge fan of Nance and think he was an incredibly underrated addition for North Carolina in the portal. In any other league outside of the Big Ten with its seven future or current NBA players last season, he would have made the all-conference team after averaging 14.6 points, 6.5 rebounds and 2.7 assists. He’s a versatile offensive weapon who shot nearly 50 percent from the field, 45 percent from 3 and over 76 percent from the line, and he’ll easily replace what Brady Manek brought to the Tar Heels last season as a grad transfer from Oklahoma. I actually think he’s also a better defender than Manek, which means I think North Carolina actually upgraded on this spot over the offseason. Nance is a terrific weak-side rim protector, and he does a good enough job of moving his feet (although he’s not quite his brother in terms of mobility). He’ll pair well with Armando Bacot as an inside-out frontcourt duo.
1) Maybe this is the bias of someone who obviously follows Nance more than the general fan. But not sure how underrated this transfer was. I saw the same points made by the author written many times in many different places. The same exact points, on how perfect he is, on paper, to replace Manek
2) Weak side rim protector. The thing that stood out to me, 2 years ago, when he actually played as a 4.
Pete Nance was Collins' best 3 point shooter last year, by a wide margin. His 46.2% dwarfed the next best option, Robbie Beran (37.9%).
Yet, Nance only attempted 3 pointers 31% of the time, lower than anyone in the rotation besides Ryan Young and Elyjah Williams. Meanwhile Audige is jacking up 3's like he thinks he's Steph Curry. And Collins claps his hands in encouragement.
Yet, Nance only attempted 3 pointers 31% of the time, lower than anyone in the rotation besides Ryan Young and Elyjah Williams. Meanwhile Audige is jacking up 3's like he thinks he's Steph Curry. And Collins claps his hands in encouragement.
| Player | 3 pt attempt rate | 3 pt shooting % | Usage rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Nance | 31.4 | 46.2 | 24.8 |
| Beran | 55.2 | 37.9 | 14.9 |
| Buie | 46.4 | 34.2 | 25.8 |
| Audige | 42.3 | 25.0 | 25.0 |
| Berry | 70.2 | 36.5 | 17.8 |
| Roper | 41.8 | 32.1 | 11.3 |
| Greer | 31.7 | 36.8 | 11.3 |
It’s a shame Audige has never learned to play under control. He must be a very frustrating teammate.
Article listing Pete as one of the top impact transfers
This transfer mania is a real turnoff for me as a long time college sports fan. Seems like semi-pros who are going to college in name only.
I would like to see grad transfers be immediate. Undergrads should have to sit a year before being eligible
If the coach leave, the undergrads should be able to transfer immediate, but not to the school the coach went too.
If the coach leave, the undergrads should be able to transfer immediate, but not to the school the coach went too.
I don't get how that applies to Pete. He played 4 years at NU, and got his degree. His case is no different from a non-athlete going elsewhere for a Masters degree, which is almost always the case (I was an exception, staying at NU for my Masters).
To your second point - our team was better and Nance was better when Nance did not play (primarily) as a 4. Which one would you have preferred happen?
I don’t think you can have it both ways, Gato. Collins can’t have utilized Nance totally the wrong way (your and PWB’s repeated assertion) and yet both he and the team improved in the last two years. Never mind that other unbiased outsiders are validating his improvement, and our record and metrics show that the team actually has improved despite what people may want to believe. Please tell me how that is a “weird” conclusion.
I wasn't referring to Pete's transfer here. The whole transfer thing seems to undermine anything resembling a student-athlete concept. Reading about the top 25 programs, all of them seem to have multiple transfers. And in football, Indiana has just eight frosh poised to sign in December and their fans are saying they are leaving lots of room for transfers. I guess now you just root for the jerseys instead of the people in them.
The top five transfers in the ACC
October 25, 2022 - On3s Jamie Shaw goes through the top five transfers coming into the ACC for the 2022-23 season.
Also this
Yes, unbiased outsiders are validating Pete Nance's value. As a 4. That appears to be the position he will play for the #1 rated team. One of the best teams in the country.
For our team to NOT improve over the past 3 seasons would have been astonishing. It was Nance, Beran, Buie, Greer and Young's 3rd season together. It was their 2nd season with Audige and Berry.
To @SDakaGordie's point though, teams would occasionally have their 4 play D on Nance which would usually cause him to struggle. Nance excelled offensively when mismatched against the other team's center.
If you were a student-athlete you would know the concept has largely been a joke for 50 years. It’s not a recent phenomenon.
This is a 2 parted response. I think nance was a very good player but in my mind a little soft. When our team went to the tournament our guys were tough. If you doubt that go back to the Michigan game and the Big Ten Tournament.
Secondly, I have a problem with the site in that I cannot go back to my last read post and always have to go down through the whole post, which is time consuming. Cappy, maybe you could help me. I have tried everything and even went to the local computer gerus who said it was a site problem.
Secondly, I have a problem with the site in that I cannot go back to my last read post and always have to go down through the whole post, which is time consuming. Cappy, maybe you could help me. I have tried everything and even went to the local computer gerus who said it was a site problem.
Nance is a little soft, but he is going to the perfect situation to show his skills.
Bakok is going to draw a double team everytime he catches the ball. Also, the shooting guard cannot be left by himself. So Nance should have a bunch of open looks on the week side. Also should be able to get some easy baskets with weak side put backs.
Just a matter if he has worked on his game and can make the shots.
Bakok is going to draw a double team everytime he catches the ball. Also, the shooting guard cannot be left by himself. So Nance should have a bunch of open looks on the week side. Also should be able to get some easy baskets with weak side put backs.
Just a matter if he has worked on his game and can make the shots.
Not quite sure on that one, it's supposed to take you to the last read post when you're logged in and click on a thread. I don't think it's a profile setting. I can try to look but can't guarantee I'll find anything.
Pete is going to be the 5th best starter. Not a knock on Pete, just a recognition that he isn't going to have to be the "man". He'll do tremendously well surrounded by a bunch of alpha-dogs. I'm pulling for him.
So you conclude a team of seniors did better than a team of sophomores, because Nance moved to play center. That surely seems the likely and reasonable explanation.
Maturation generally helps an individual, but that’s not a full-proof or sole reason for improvement relative to competition, who are also improving. UNC thinks Pete has improved a lot, enough to include him as a starter on a #1 ranked team; you don’t think Collins has any part of that improvement, so let’s just agree to strongly disagree.
Not sure why you pivoted to discuss CC's merits on Nance's development. Made zero comments about that.
Oh my, seriously - you’ve never commented that CCC doesn’t develop players well? Come on. I did it based on your comment about “misusing” as a 5; a major part of your prior misuse commentary.
I don't recall taking any particular strong position on CC developing players well or not. Feel free to research.
Anyway, too many unknowns. For every Nance there's a Benson or more. It's a difficult exercise to understand if a player developed as normal or developed more because of a coach. One would think if Nance saw CC as a great developer he would stick around. But then, maybe not, because CC can't give him exposure or a competitive team.
The Nance as a 5 was a complete misuse in light of having a good center sitting on the bench. It did not serve the team or the player. An astonishingly bad decision. There, I do have (very strong) comments. No need to research. I just wrote them again.
The last thing I would find productive is to do research on / for you. I didn’t just make up my thoughts on your prior positions out of thin air.
UNC is also “astonished” by CCC’s decision, I am sure. And so is the data scientist whose model disproved your and PWB’s assertions about best lineups.
UNC is also “astonished” by CCC’s decision, I am sure. And so is the data scientist whose model disproved your and PWB’s assertions about best lineups.
1) Research would be for you buddy. I have no desire to prove a point you tried to make. It's your point.
2) UNC is so impressed by CC they will definitely use Nance as a 5.
3) You know well that it's impossible to prove if we would have done better with Nance as a 4 or a 5. I can make a million points about it. A million models can be built. And still, we can't go back and replay the season with my assumptions. What's possible to prove is our mediocre record and the overwhelming disappointment the last two seasons were. Would love to hear what credible analyst wrote about last season as an at least par for the course year.
I’ve done plenty to prove my points. Please don’t ask me to do any research, however / whomever you deem as owning it.
Coaches adjust to their players. Collins did that with Nance and it worked for Nance and the team improved (as record and stats and eye test of competitiveness all proved). Young was his same self, with many limitations that have been discussed as nauseum. The team didn’t improve as much as we all wanted.
Happy to strongly disagree with you that you are unsure whether you think Collins developed Nance. That’s what was on the table here, at least in my writings, and you can feel free to disagree with that as well.
So no source to corroborate your twisted logic pretzel that last year was fine, (albeit not as fine as you hoped)? Just need one write up from a legit analyst? One?
Who said it was fine? It was improved, but not where any of us would like it to be. The latter is not easy for NU. I just then said it didn’t merit his firing. Please don’t twist things - so ironic, isn’t it?
I did - multiple times.
They must be using misdirection by listing him on the roster as a 4. Bacot is the 5.
2025-26 Men's Basketball Roster - University of North Carolina Athletics
The official 2025-26 Men's Basketball Roster for the North Carolina Heels
As badly as last season played out, the thing that stood out to me was how Collins substituted players when we played D1 opponents.
He used Nance, Beran, Audige and Buie with Roper 14.6% of the time.
He used Nance, Beran, Audige and Buie with Berry 8.9% of the time.
Those were "the starters." After that, there was no lineup that played regularly.
He used Nance, Beran, Buie, Audige and Greer 3.0% of the time.
He used Young, Williams, Berry, Audige and Greer 2.8% of the time.
He used Nance, Young, Roper, Audige and Buie 2.3% of the time.
He used Nance, Williams, Berry, Audige and Greer 2.2% of the time.
There was no continuity - two thirds of every game was played by 5 man units who averaged less than a minute per game together. That strikes me as extremely odd.