A team full of six men.

[NewMexHawk]

I think that in the Big 10, Iowa's team primarily consists of a team of role players and 6th men. Perhaps Gatens would start for some teams in the Big 10 but that's it. The rest of the team are role players, young or not.

And unless Iowa gets one or two players that can really lead this team that is what Iowa will have even when they are experienced...a team consisting primarily of role players with one or two players that might be able to start for a couple of other teams in the Big 10.

Lickliter has always said he does not need stars to compete. That is why he has his "system" and that is the BIG question mark for Iowa in the Big 10. Will they be able to be anymore than a .500 team even when they are all experienced players WITHOUT the one or two star players?

It is VERY obvious right now that Iowa needs a big man--6 10, 6 11, or 7 0 to compete with other big 10 teams. When we play other teams with big men we have HUGE problems inside. We don't match up well in the guard court with the better teams in the Big 10 so can we ever hope to do anything other than split with those teams and possibly split with most teams in the Big 10? We live and die by the three in the big 10...not a good formula in the big 10 with role players.

 

[HawkI101]

I would agree that Smith and Pierce would be good first option guys but Haluska and Recker, in my opinion, were good 2nd and 3rd options that had to be first options. 1st option guys play in the NBA. I may even give you Recker, but not Haluska.

 

[HawkIreign]

More like we die by the three.

 

[HawkIreign]

I would agree that Smith and Pierce would be good first option guys but Haluska and Recker, in my opinion, were good 2nd and 3rd options that had to be first options. 1st option guys play in the NBA. I may even give you Recker, but not Haluska.

Didn't Haluska lead the BT in scoring? Wasn't Recker putting up like 24 ppg before he got hurt? Both of those guys would lead 90% of major level teams in scoring in my opinion.

 

[HawkI101]

I don't think Haluska finished the season as the scoring leader but could be wrong, but I am 99% sure that he lead in shot attempts also. After Horner, Brunner, Hansen, and Thomas left Haluska was forced to score a lot more which he did well, but I wouldn't consider him a #1.

 

[qchawks57]

Maybe not under Lick but he've had some pretty good first option guys. Haluska, Tyler Smith, Pierre, and Recker. Actually GAtens wouldn't have even started on the Horner, Pierce, Haluska, Brunner, Hanson team and wouldn't have been the first guy of the bench all the time with Doug Thomas being an option.[/QUOTE

And Doug Thomas was the "best athlete in the Big Ten" and even he couldnt crack the starting 5.

 

[tubahawk]

think it could be just you. remember there are two freshman, two sophmores and a junior in the starting five.

Young team or not, I think it is fair to say the team is full of 6th man players. That may not be true in 2 or 3 years, but right now it accurately describes what we are putting on the floor for our starting line-up.