+/- ?

R

revkev73

Well-Known Member
Iowa was 13-13 at the FT line 100%

Baer was the leading rebounder. Baer and Jok leading the team in rebounds is an insult to the bigs on Iowa's team. Guys need to figure this out...quickly...Cook, Wagner, Uhl, Pemsl, et. al....

It was nice to see Kriener contribute. He has hustle, seemed to act like he wanted to be out there...which was lacking in some of our players.

I just don't see Williams doing much...he labors to get the ball up the court, doesn't finish well, doesn't shoot well. What is his role, his strength?

Jok is playing himself into a developmental, European NBA prospect...quickly.

Iowa is going to have to improve to end up being a .500 team.
 
revkev73 said:
Iowa was 13-13 at the FT line 100%

Baer was the leading rebounder. Baer and Jok leading the team in rebounds is an insult to the bigs on Iowa's team. Guys need to figure this out...quickly...Cook, Wagner, Uhl, Pemsl, et. al....

It was nice to see Kriener contribute. He has hustle, seemed to act like he wanted to be out there...which was lacking in some of our players.

I just don't see Williams doing much...he labors to get the ball up the court, doesn't finish well, doesn't shoot well. What is his role, his strength?

Jok is playing himself into a developmental, European NBA prospect...quickly.

Iowa is going to have to improve to end up being a .500 team.
Click to expand...

Can't say I disagree with any of this at all. Well done.
 
I'm just saying - it's not as bad as last night looked and not as good as it looked vs ISU either - young team, look for these early minutes to pay dividends over the next 4 seasons.
 
I agree...IGC...

Purdue wasn't beatable last night. There are always games like that in sports.

In a broader, long term, sense...it seems to me one of the failings/challenges of Fran ball is i. e. a bunch of long, wing players...without much of a PG or Big Man contribution. This is where his recruiting (or lack thereof) has led, like it or not.

Against a quality opponent Iowa is vulnerable outside and in the paint...Iowa's defense and offense were rendered pretty much helpless by Purdue.

Side note...nice to see someone like Cook, playing for Iowa, with the athletic ability to pound it home under the basket with raw talent.
 
Last night was brutal. Didn't really win one aspect of the game. This is the equiv of the Iowa vs Penn St football debacle.

Not sure what Dom Uhl is going to bring anymore. He's an upperclassman but I see him losing minutes as the season goes. I remember his turnover.

Look. This is a young team so are going to have games like this and will be a roller coaster of a season. Don't like it but it is what it is. Too many freshman to have consistency. Their rotation on the zone was absolutely horrific last night. That was a little disconcerting.

I think they could have lobbed the ball into Haas any time they wanted to last night. They could have done it all night long if they wanted to, IMO. We had no answer. Purdue is a really hard guard and they have more ingredients than last year. Actually, they may battle for the conference c-ship with the make-up of that team.

Feel bad for Jok. Sucks being a lone senior and very good player on a team full of freshman. Nobody's fault. Not Jok's fault and not really the fault of all the freshman.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Last night was brutal. Didn't really win one aspect of the game. This is the equiv of the Iowa vs Penn St football debacle.

Not sure what Dom Uhl is going to bring anymore. He's an upperclassman but I see him losing minutes as the season goes. I remember his turnover.

Look. This is a young team so are going to have games like this and will be a roller coaster of a season. Don't like it but it is what it is. Too many freshman to have consistency. Their rotation on the zone was absolutely horrific last night. That was a little disconcerting.

I think they could have lobbed the ball into Haas any time they wanted to last night. They could have done it all night long if they wanted to, IMO. We had no answer. Purdue is a really hard guard and they have more ingredients than last year. Actually, they may battle for the conference c-ship with the make-up of that team.

Feel bad for Jok. Sucks being a lone senior and very good player on a team full of freshman. Nobody's fault. Not Jok's fault and not really the fault of all the freshman.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it's nobody's fault. I think you can fault the coaching staff for how they recruited the last few years. It does really suck for Jok but if he doesn't show more consistency defensively it's going to be hard for me to feel too bad for him
 
Hawk5656 said:
I wouldn't say it's nobody's fault. I think you can fault the coaching staff for how they recruited the last few years. It does really suck for Jok but if he doesn't show more consistency defensively it's going to be hard for me to feel too bad for him
Click to expand...


Yes, there is definitely blame to go around but I guess I'm saying we should expect some growing pains this year. I'm not ready to blame the coaches for this recruiting yet as Iowa could have some very exciting years coming up and potential conference championship contenders. In addition bringing in the next two years classes will add to it and strengthen even more.

The missing link is a kick ass point guard, though. One that can create a shot when needed or give 15 plus points a game.
 
MelroseHawkins said:
Last night was brutal. Didn't really win one aspect of the game. This is the equiv of the Iowa vs Penn St football debacle.

Not sure what Dom Uhl is going to bring anymore. He's an upperclassman but I see him losing minutes as the season goes. I remember his turnover.

Look. This is a young team so are going to have games like this and will be a roller coaster of a season. Don't like it but it is what it is. Too many freshman to have consistency. Their rotation on the zone was absolutely horrific last night. That was a little disconcerting.

I think they could have lobbed the ball into Haas any time they wanted to last night. They could have done it all night long if they wanted to, IMO. We had no answer. Purdue is a really hard guard and they have more ingredients than last year. Actually, they may battle for the conference c-ship with the make-up of that team.

Feel bad for Jok. Sucks being a lone senior and very good player on a team full of freshman. Nobody's fault. Not Jok's fault and not really the fault of all the freshman.
Click to expand...

We did a fairly good job of limiting the touches and opportunities of their bigs in the 1st half with the zone. With so much concentration on the interior it left us vulnerable to the outside 3s and they burnt us big time in the first half.

The 2nd half is when we played some man and when Haas dominated us for a couple straight possessions.
 
Playing freshmen @ a hostile, top B1G/national team/arena with payback on their mind.

Some of those guys playing were riding yellow school buses to their games 12 months ago.

Other than last year, our last win @ Mackey was 2006.

No surprise here.
 
revkev73 said:
Actually, it seemed more like a 50-60 point margin, watching it...
Click to expand...
Purdue had a lot of experience over Iowa, and they do have some quality players. The bad news is Michigan has had a long time to prepare for Iowa, the good news is Iowa doesn't really know what they are planning on doing yet. The Iowa team is a work in progress. I think they will do good, and I enjoy watching them.
 
If you recruit B1G level players you won't have to play the entire bench in an attempt to run the other team into the ground and try to come back at the end of the game. The large rotation of players is a gimmick that has been tried over and over through the years by many teams to try to help cover for less talented players. Funny how these type of teams also seem to live and die by the three point shot and struggle in the paint.

Am I the only one that sees this? Maybe I need to go see an eye doctor. If you are recruiting in the top six of your conference then you play really just eight players and the rest of the team is only there to give brief breaks. The five starters each have a role and they know what it is. They specialize at it to the point where the fans in general (excluding those few that lack any basic understanding of the game) know what each players role is.

It's interesting to look at Lick ball, Fran ball and Lute ball. Lick tried to run certain plays directly at opening shots at any given point in the scheme of that play. Failed because he didn't have the quality of players to be successful.

Fran ball seems more similar to street ball. Pass around and try to find an open player if there isn't one try to dribble penatrate and pass back out when the defense collapses and hope some one is open and can hit the open shot.

Lute ball was organized and well structured. Plays were set up to cause the defense to react which in turn would leave players open on the next pass or the one after that. Lute recruited average to slightly better than average players but would define each players role and set plays to maximize their strongest skills. No gimmicks, just maximize each players strongest abiltiies and design plays that puts them in a position to utilize and maximize those skills. That's what the GREAT coaches do.

Gimmicks are for teams who lack the talent to play head to head with other quality teams. (For good illustration look and study Lickliter phenomena known as the Butler way).
 
BigD said:
If you recruit B1G level players you won't have to play the entire bench in an attempt to run the other team into the ground and try to come back at the end of the game. The large rotation of players is a gimmick that has been tried over and over through the years by many teams to try to help cover for less talented players. Funny how these type of teams also seem to live and die by the three point shot and struggle in the paint.

Am I the only one that sees this? Maybe I need to go see an eye doctor. If you are recruiting in the top six of your conference then you play really just eight players and the rest of the team is only there to give brief breaks. The five starters each have a role and they know what it is. They specialize at it to the point where the fans in general (excluding those few that lack any basic understanding of the game) know what each players role is.

It's interesting to look at Lick ball, Fran ball and Lute ball. Lick tried to run certain plays directly at opening shots at any given point in the scheme of that play. Failed because he didn't have the quality of players to be successful.

Fran ball seems more similar to street ball. Pass around and try to find an open player if there isn't one try to dribble penatrate and pass back out when the defense collapses and hope some one is open and can hit the open shot.

Lute ball was organized and well structured. Plays were set up to cause the defense to react which in turn would leave players open on the next pass or the one after that. Lute recruited average to slightly better than average players but would define each players role and set plays to maximize their strongest skills. No gimmicks, just maximize each players strongest abiltiies and design plays that puts them in a position to utilize and maximize those skills. That's what the GREAT coaches do.

Gimmicks are for teams who lack the talent to play head to head with other quality teams. (For good illustration look and study Lickliter phenomena known as the Butler way).
Click to expand...

Exactly this about recruiting and most people think this is a very talented roster
 
There was absolutely no way we were going to win at Purdue Wednesday Evening. Ken Pom had @ Purdue and @ WIsconsin as certain losses for the Hawks with a 10% chance of winning.....

Brutal arena filled with HawkHating fools, who were booing the referees in the second half with a 30 point lead.....

Peter Jok was shoved and pushed all over the place. While in midair moving he would be pushed off balance every time. No call from the zebras. They were saving the calls for touch fouls against the Hawks. Pi$$ Poor officiating all night.....

Freshman point guard Edwards killed us. We had no answer for him. Must contain him in IC.....

We did very well containing Haas and Swanigan the first half, however sagging in the middle to contain them did leave the perimeter wide open. Six of one and a half dozen of the other.....

I was pleased with Cordell and Tyler as the game carried on. They adjusted well, despite being saddled with fouls early. Referees effectively hampered Jok, Cook and Pemsl early in the game. Despite that, our bigs, including Kreiner played well as the game went on. Cordell and Cook were effective and Almost unstoppable in the second half. Tyler is very quick under the basket and Cordell has very good moves, slipping and sliding to the basket. Hawks need to work on helping out around the basket. When Cordell and Cook come out to guard someone driving to the basket, Someone has to cover behind them, protecting the basket....


Excellent learning experience for the young Hawks. Good to have it out of the way early in the BIg season. Time to learn and move on.

Oh, Yeah.....Baer and Brady were very good the entire game. Brady was unconscious scoring at will and Nicholas was.....Nicholas once again.....

The number of Hawk shots that rolled around the rim, eventually bouncing or rolling out were many, while Everything the boilermakers put up seemed to swish through the basket. One of those nights that happen to every team at least once every season. Good to have this one out of the way.....

The, Just One Of Those Games, factor was in play. Hopefully that will be the only one the remainder of the season.....

I look for a rejuvenated Hawkeye basketball team Sunday against Michigan, not unlike the bounce back against the clones.....

Merely thoughts wandering around my head.....

Nothing more.....
 
Last edited:
BigD said:
If you recruit B1G level players you won't have to play the entire bench in an attempt to run the other team into the ground and try to come back at the end of the game. The large rotation of players is a gimmick that has been tried over and over through the years by many teams to try to help cover for less talented players. Funny how these type of teams also seem to live and die by the three point shot and struggle in the paint.

Am I the only one that sees this? Maybe I need to go see an eye doctor. If you are recruiting in the top six of your conference then you play really just eight players and the rest of the team is only there to give brief breaks. The five starters each have a role and they know what it is. They specialize at it to the point where the fans in general (excluding those few that lack any basic understanding of the game) know what each players role is.

It's interesting to look at Lick ball, Fran ball and Lute ball. Lick tried to run certain plays directly at opening shots at any given point in the scheme of that play. Failed because he didn't have the quality of players to be successful.

Fran ball seems more similar to street ball. Pass around and try to find an open player if there isn't one try to dribble penatrate and pass back out when the defense collapses and hope some one is open and can hit the open shot.

Lute ball was organized and well structured. Plays were set up to cause the defense to react which in turn would leave players open on the next pass or the one after that. Lute recruited average to slightly better than average players but would define each players role and set plays to maximize their strongest skills. No gimmicks, just maximize each players strongest abiltiies and design plays that puts them in a position to utilize and maximize those skills. That's what the GREAT coaches do.

Gimmicks are for teams who lack the talent to play head to head with other quality teams. (For good illustration look and study Lickliter phenomena known as the Butler way).
Click to expand...

I get what you are saying about not needing a gimmick if you have better players. But isn't finding a gimmick that helps you win considered good coaching?
 
Popovich ball sure seems to work well...all the players know their roles, and play to their strengths and not their weaknesses. Not playing defense within the system and with intensity earns the bench or a quick trade.

It is a well-oiled machine designed for team victories. So many game plans, including Fran ball, seem to be Helter-Skelter street ball exercises in, well, whatever it is they do. Little boxing out, pick and rolls in the wrong direction, standing around, wondering what to do next. It is that difficult to teach good team basketball?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top