As frustrating as that game was....

H

Hawkfnntn

Well-Known Member
Iowa didn't have to play a whole lot better to have made Indy sweat more. If Iowa cuts their turnovers down to say 12 instead of 19 and scores on 3 of those 7 more theoretical shots that's 6 more pts. More if they hit a 3. They ended up shooting 17-24 from the line. Not terrible yet misleading because I think they missed the front end of a 1-1 3 times. That's 4-6 more pts that could have easily been on the board.(huge pet peeve of mine)

Watching the game I thought Indiana hand picked the refs. However looking at the stats they only called 2 more fouls on Iowa then them. That jumped off the page at me considering Indiana shot 42 free throws to the Hawks 24. So it's all about the when the fouls were called and game situation.

I would mention the 3 pt shooting however Indiana was just as terrible so it really didn't factor.

In a game where the Hawks hold 2 of their starters (Watford and Hulls) to a combined 0-15 shooting and 7 pts total. It shows that this team is working at the D end of the floor. Hulls was frustrated all night.

Like alot of fans seeing Oglesby starting over Clemmons was surprising. Yet when you look at the stats. Neither made a bucket and Oglesby had one more assist and one less turnover than Clemmons... Not much to take from that really but I do think it's fair to say it didn't matter and going forward the rest of the year unless Sapp has a big game I don't see coach tinkering with starting lineup much.
 


That and Iowa had the same amount of made field goals as Indiana (21) on only one more shot attempt. Again this game should have been within single digits if not for the refs bailing out Indiana and letting them go to the charity stripe.
 


Hawkfnntn said:
Iowa didn't have to play a whole lot better to have made Indy sweat more. If Iowa cuts their turnovers down to say 12 instead of 19 and scores on 3 of those 7 more theoretical shots that's 6 more pts. More if they hit a 3. They ended up shooting 17-24 from the line. Not terrible yet misleading because I think they missed the front end of a 1-1 3 times. That's 4-6 more pts that could have easily been on the board.(huge pet peeve of mine)

Watching the game I thought Indiana hand picked the refs. However looking at the stats they only called 2 more fouls on Iowa then them. That jumped off the page at me considering Indiana shot 42 free throws to the Hawks 24. So it's all about the when the fouls were called and game situation.

I would mention the 3 pt shooting however Indiana was just as terrible so it really didn't factor.

In a game where the Hawks hold 2 of their starters (Watford and Hulls) to a combined 0-15 shooting and 7 pts total. It shows that this team is working at the D end of the floor. Hulls was frustrated all night.

Like alot of fans seeing Oglesby starting over Clemmons was surprising. Yet when you look at the stats. Neither made a bucket and Oglesby had one more assist and one less turnover than Clemmons... Not much to take from that really but I do think it's fair to say it didn't matter and going forward the rest of the year unless Sapp has a big game I don't see coach tinkering with starting lineup much.
Click to expand...

Except Iowa had to play a whole lot better to classify the game as a bad effort. They were awful and awfully exposed. The score was much closer than the game was
 


Yes the shooting was a big problem and turnovers, but so was rebounding. They gave up way to many second chances after playing great defense.
 


When Indiana got up by double digits they seemed to go into cruise control...Oladipo didn't play a whole lot in the second half and Zeller got more breaks than he would normally.
 




ILHawk said:
Except Iowa had to play a whole lot better to classify the game as a bad effort. They were awful and awfully exposed. The score was much closer than the game was
Click to expand...

I disagree with your last comment. Sure, the Hoosiers got a lead and maintained it. Save for a late run, the lead was there all game. The Hawks played hard all night (especially on D), and kept the game from getting blown out. We even made runs a couple times, and nearly reeled them in, IMO. Additionally, Indiana hit 2 threes in the final minute to open it up a little more.
 


ILHawk said:
Except Iowa had to play a whole lot better to classify the game as a bad effort. They were awful and awfully exposed. The score was much closer than the game was
Click to expand...

They were exposed as not being better than the number one team in the nation on the road without our starting pg, we're a bunch of frauds I tell ya!!
 


Eda said:
I disagree with your last comment. ..... The Hawks played hard all night (especially on D), and kept the game from getting blown out. We even made runs a couple times, and nearly reeled them
Click to expand...

images
images
 


Indiana was being aggressive and attacking the basket. Zeller had 13 FT's from Indiana getting the ball to him in the post, and Yogi shot 10 as a result of his attacking the basket. Iowa was content to work the ball around the perimeter and did not do a a good job of getting the ball into the post. When they were fouled it was before they were able to get into the lane and get the shot off.

I'll be curious to see if Iowa will outshoot the last two opponents from the stripe without Gesell. His ability to penetrate and hit the jumper are going to be missed.
 


ssckelley said:
Yes the shooting was a big problem and turnovers, but so was rebounding. They gave up way to many second chances after playing great defense.
Click to expand...
It seemed that rebounding was a problem to me watching the game also. However Iowa had 2 more Offensive boards than they did and one more total for the game then they did. That also surprised me when I found that out.
 


ILHawk said:
Except Iowa had to play a whole lot better to classify the game as a bad effort. They were awful and awfully exposed. The score was much closer than the game was
Click to expand...
It was an ugly game yes. However if you break the numbers down of how this game went it wasn't that lopsided. And why is that? Because of some combo of Indiana having an off game/overlooking Iowa and Iowa playing pretty good D and rebounding themselves? End of the day I agree Indiana is a better team top to bottom no doubt. I don't see the gap being what your describing it tho. I think it'd been exposed prior to this game that Iowa is short on ball handlers that can create and or shoot. What else was exposed that you saw?
 


Hawkfnntn said:
It was an ugly game yes. However if you break the numbers down of how this game went it wasn't that lopsided. And why is that? Because of some combo of Indiana having an off game/overlooking Iowa and Iowa playing pretty good D and rebounding themselves? End of the day I agree Indiana is a better team top to bottom no doubt. I don't see the gap being what your describing it tho. I think it'd been exposed prior to this game that Iowa is short on ball handlers that can create and or shoot. What else was exposed that you saw?
Click to expand...

We're 29 games into the season, and we're ranked 18th in the nation in FG% defense and 6th in the nation in 3pt FG% defense, at some point you have to realize it's not a fluke that teams keep having off days against us.
 


zhawk21 said:
That and Iowa had the same amount of made field goals as Indiana (21) on only one more shot attempt. Again this game should have been within single digits if not for the refs bailing out Indiana and letting them go to the charity stripe.
Click to expand...

Wow...I had no idea Iowa had the same amount of field goals as Indiana! (NO sarcasm) So, free throws were a major factor and like you, I felt that Indiana got a lot of benefits from the officiating. Thanks for point out the field goal thing.
 


atxhawk said:
Indiana was being aggressive and attacking the basket. Zeller had 13 FT's from Indiana getting the ball to him in the post, and Yogi shot 10 as a result of his attacking the basket. Iowa was content to work the ball around the perimeter and did not do a a good job of getting the ball into the post. When they were fouled it was before they were able to get into the lane and get the shot off.

I'll be curious to see if Iowa will outshoot the last two opponents from the stripe without Gesell. His ability to penetrate and hit the jumper are going to be missed.
Click to expand...

Iowa will have to get to the line more than Illinois and Nebraska to have a realistic shot at winning those games. Iowa misses Gesell, but more for the fact that he is better than the guys now getting his minutes (Oglesby, Clemmons) and not so much that he gets us to the line more. Hawks shot 29 free throws against Purdue the first game he was out, so it's not like Gesell being out means Iowa can't get to the line. Gesell averages less than 2 FT attempts per game, he's not been a guy who draws a lot of fouls.

I don't really think Iowa was "content" to work the ball around the perimeter. It looks that way when the opponent is better than you are. When every pass is contested and every perimeter defender is playing tight, it leaves the offense little choice except to try and drive the ball to the basket. And Iowa has basically one guy who can do that with any consistency (Marble) and another (White) who can if playing against a slower-footed big. Indiana had Ferrell, Oladipo, Zeller, Watford (depending on matchup) and Sheehey who can all get to the basket. Once Iowa calmed down in the second half and played with a bit more assertiveness in the second half, the scoring went up. But by that time Indiana had itself found a ryhthm on offense and scored as well.
 






You must log in or register to reply here.


Latest posts

Share this page






Top