Are we the third best team in Iowa?

Hawk5656 said:
He spreads the floor more than Mike, I don't think he's a better passer. Mike could get to the rim and could drive and kick and was a really good defender. Mike's problem was he wasn't usually very clutch and I think Bohannon can hit some big 3's in his career and he wasn't a terrific free throw shooter. Mike was super athletic though and could make a lot of plays that I don't think Bohannon will ever be able to do because of his limitations
Click to expand...


Hey 56, it looks like YOU said Mike wasn't very
Clutch, and JB CAn hit big shots
 
DP5555 said:
He is a solid overall player right now, and he will continue to improve with experience, and a collegiate S+C program will help as well. Kid has a bright future continuing to make you look stupid.
Click to expand...

I said he wouldn't be good and he hasn't been so far. I'm not the one looking stupid
 
Hawk5656 said:
I said he wouldn't be good and he hasn't been so far. I'm not the one looking stupid
Click to expand...
Bohannon is averaging more points, more rebounds, more assists, better free-throw %, better 3-point % than Mike Gesell did in his Junior year. I don't see how that qualifies as "he hasn't been [good] so far." Unless, of course, you're delusional and just hate Bohannon.
 
HAWKEY3 said:
Bohannon is averaging more points, more rebounds, more assists, better free-throw %, better 3-point % than Mike Gesell did in his Junior year. I don't see how that qualifies as "he hasn't been [good] so far." Unless, of course, you're delusional and just hate Bohannon.
Click to expand...

He hasn't even gotten to conference play yet
 
Hawk5656 said:
He hasn't even gotten to conference play yet
Click to expand...
So what? You can only measure him based on what he's done. Notre Dame, Virginia -- both ranked teams. Seton Hall also good, though not ranked. It's not as though Iowa has not played any decent teams.

Speaking of the two ranked teams:
Virginia -- Bohannon = 6 points & 4 rebounds
Notre Dame -- Bohannon = 23 points & 7 assists

Seriously, there's nothing to indicate that he is anything less than an excellent young point guard whom Iowans should be proud of welcoming to our team. Quit being a whiner -- you're just wrong.
 
Hawk5656 said:
I said he wouldn't be good and he hasn't been so far. I'm not the one looking stupid
Click to expand...

Yes. Yes you are. Believe what you want, but it's painfully obvious to everyone else that you look like a moron right now. A role it appears you must enjoy. You wear it well I must say. You're completely delusional.
 
DP5555 said:
He is a solid overall player right now, and he will continue to improve with experience, and a collegiate S+C program will help as well. Kid has a bright future continuing to make you look stupid.
Click to expand...

You are correct. This kid has a great future with Iowa and I am glad we finally got one of the Bohannons here at Iowa.
Prediction #1 J-Bo will be Iowa's all-time 3 point shooter by the end of his career at Iowa.
Prediction #2 J-Bo and his band of young buddies will lead Iowa to its' first regular season, BIG title in decades before they are finished.
 
Last edited:
DP5555 said:
Yes. Yes you are. Believe what you want, but it's painfully obvious to everyone else that you look like a moron right now. A role it appears you must enjoy. You wear it well I must say. You're completely delusional.
Click to expand...

Saying someone isn't good and they haven't been so far isn't delusional
 
Hawk5656 said:
Saying someone isn't good and they haven't been so far isn't delusional
Click to expand...

But you make up different rules for different players. Players aren't always great their Fr year and become very solid players, even great players. Plus all you talk about is efficiency ratings like nothing else matters. What is most important, PER, offensive ratings, or (PPG, APG, RPG)?

I'll take the traditional ratings myself. I can give your traditional stats and you can tell me how big of a roll they play and how much they mean to a team. I could give you a PER or Orating and you wouldn't have a clue what their role was or how good they are.
 
deanvogs said:
But you make up different rules for different players. Players aren't always great their Fr year and become very solid players, even great players. Plus all you talk about is efficiency ratings like nothing else matters. What is most important, PER, offensive ratings, or (PPG, APG, RPG)?

I'll take the traditional ratings myself. I can give your traditional stats and you can tell me how big of a roll they play and how much they mean to a team. I could give you a PER or Orating and you wouldn't have a clue what their role was or how good they are.
Click to expand...

I am not saying Bohannon can't be good. He's struggling like most freshman do
 
deanvogs said:
But you make up different rules for different players. Players aren't always great their Fr year and become very solid players, even great players. Plus all you talk about is efficiency ratings like nothing else matters. What is most important, PER, offensive ratings, or (PPG, APG, RPG)?

I'll take the traditional ratings myself. I can give your traditional stats and you can tell me how big of a roll they play and how much they mean to a team. I could give you a PER or Orating and you wouldn't have a clue what their role was or how good they are.
Click to expand...

What different rules am I making up for other players? PPG doesn't paint a good picture if you're shooting poorly from the floor. If Jok was averaging 30 ppg but shooting 30% from the floor that wouldn't be good
 
deanvogs said:
Hold on here, this is a MAJOR shift in what you have been saying.
Click to expand...

I don't think he can be good defensively. I think his ceiling is average at best but I could be wrong and he could end up being a good player. He obviously hasn't been good so far, at least we can agree on that
 
Hawk5656 said:
What different rules am I making up for other players? PPG doesn't paint a good picture if you're shooting poorly from the floor. If Jok was averaging 30 ppg but shooting 30% from the floor that wouldn't be good
Click to expand...

Being slightly less more efficient doesn't make one a better player tho. Other things are much more important than efficiency. ORating and ever PER bring no perspective to the stats. Here is a good example:



Fr 12 PPG 21 PER
So 17 PPG 19 PER

Would you rather have said player as a Fr or So? I know I'll take 5 PPG over 2 PER any day. Was his PER inflated because he didn't plays as big of roll, or wasn't asked to do as much? Did he lose valuable players around him that inflated his PER?
 
deanvogs said:
Being slightly less more efficient doesn't make one a better player tho. Other things are much more important than efficiency. ORating and ever PER bring no perspective to the stats. Here is a good example:



Fr 12 PPG 21 PER
So 17 PPG 19 PER

Would you rather have said player as a Fr or So? I know I'll take 5 PPG over 2 PER any day. Was his PER inflated because he didn't plays as big of roll, or wasn't asked to do as much? Did he lose valuable players around him that inflated his PER?
Click to expand...

19 and 21 are both good PER so both look good to me. I'd rather have the 17 ppg though and give up 2 on the PER since that's a pretty small gap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top