At least Jok is stepping up!

ibahawkeye said:
I think Jok is better than Uthoff as a junior. Fran's players always progress. I''ll be excited to see just how much Jok can continue to improve. He'll obviously garner all the attention from the opposing teams D with the loss of the 4 seniors.
Click to expand...

But it will be nice to have a go to guy like Jok next year. It makes things easier for the new guys trying to find their way when there is a veteran all conference player on the team. And if Jok improves as much as he has season to season thus far...Just get the he11 out of his way.
 
Hawkfnntn said:
Jok wasn't hogging the ball... Not even close. If anything he needed more touches/shots. Uthoff just hasn't looked himself... I can't put my finger on what his deal is but somethings up with him. Not having a PG that can penetrate and be a threat to score really hurts us. MG is good at what he does but that one element he's lacking is pretty big and it showed last night. And what about our D??? Sure they hit a ton of threes but they were mostly open looks. If Jok had as many open looks he'd have made more too. Jok was the only reason Iowa even made that a game down the stretch.... And a Hawk fan thinks he was "ballhogging"... good grief.
Click to expand...

Iowa's fans have a knack for this - if we have a star player that can carry the team, he's accused of being a ball hog and that we'd be better off without him. Ricky Davis got branded with that, and I've seen the same thing said about Luke Recker and Devyn Marble.

I suppose Peter Jok will be the next. Do you guys really think Iowa would be better without him? I think not.
 
Hawkfnntn said:
Jok wasn't hogging the ball... Not even close. If anything he needed more touches/shots. Uthoff just hasn't looked himself... I can't put my finger on what his deal is but somethings up with him. Not having a PG that can penetrate and be a threat to score really hurts us. MG is good at what he does but that one element he's lacking is pretty big and it showed last night. And what about our D??? Sure they hit a ton of threes but they were mostly open looks. If Jok had as many open looks he'd have made more too. Jok was the only reason Iowa even made that a game down the stretch.... And a Hawk fan thinks he was "ballhogging"... good grief.
Click to expand...

MG is solid at getting us into our sets and running our stuff. However, as a PG, he is a below avg shooter, horrible late games at the line, and can't create or finish. On top of all of that he is not quick by today's standards. This team with Ulis....
 
SteveGarvey said:
I don't think it's cut and dried as far as Jok's performance last night. He made a couple of incredible 3s at the end but he also forced some threes that had little hope of going in. He also made a really bad pass towards the end of the game after we actually made a stop on D. His D has improved but it's still easy for a quicker guard to get past him towards the hoop.

Uthoff looks off but I think it's because the defense is so keyed on him to stop him, basically being in his jock all night.
Click to expand...
Oh I agree Jok wasn't perfect by any means. I cussed him out over that same pass your talking about. But he didn't make it because he's a ball hog like the OP is suggesting. He was/is the only one out there that was making any jumpers. Clemmons pretty much disappeared he was frustrated all night. When both he and MG aren't doing much it's just going to be tough for our offense to do as well bench or no bench. All that said I don't think that's the biggest problem. Their defense was terrible. Too many open 3s and layups. Not to mention getting out rebounded. It blows me away as much 2/3 zone that they play. If the other team has a good pg that can drive he's going to get others open shots out of it not to mention offensive rebounds when they do miss cause we can't box out in it... More man to man or some matchup zones instead of that would be nice.
 
1977Hawkeye said:
Iowa's fans have a knack for this - if we have a star player that can carry the team, he's accused of being a ball hog and that we'd be better off without him. Ricky Davis got branded with that, and I've seen the same thing said about Luke Recker and Devyn Marble.

I suppose Peter Jok will be the next. Do you guys really think Iowa would be better without him? I think not.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Would you rather have MG/Sap or pick a bench guard out there chucking up shots in the 2nd half of that game when we were behind the whole time? I sure wouldn't. Jok did his best and was the most positive player we had out there. Uthoff needs to find his mojo again. If he's missing free throws like that somethings up with him and I think it's just in his head...
 
“We’re relying on those guys a little too much,â€￾ Woodbury said of Jok and Uthoff. “At times, we force those guys into bad shots on the shot clock. We’ve got to rectify some of those problems and just get better.â€￾

Woodbury agrees with me. Why don't you guys?
 
WestCoastHawk said:
“We’re relying on those guys a little too much,â€￾ Woodbury said of Jok and Uthoff. “At times, we force those guys into bad shots on the shot clock. We’ve got to rectify some of those problems and just get better.â€￾

Woodbury agrees with me. Why don't you guys?
Click to expand...

Because that's not what you said.
 
Either a 3rd consistent scorer needs to emerge or the entire group has to play better. Remember the games where we had like 6 guys in double figures? Now it's like down to 3 or 4 guys. But that's not even what worries me the most. Defense defense defense...
 
WestCoastHawk said:
Kind of strange we start losing games when Jok's numbers get inflated. We don't move the ball nearly as well when he's ball hogging it.
Click to expand...

WestCoastHawk said:
This offense has no movement when Jok is putting up a bunch of shots. Direct correlation between the offense looking stagnant and Jok scoring a lot. Do you guys watch the games, or nah?
Click to expand...

In 14 B1G games to date, Pete is averaging 12.6 shots per game while averaging 30.5 minutes played per B1G game. That amounts to .41 shots per minute for Jok.

This means that if Jok took the EXACT SAME AMOUNT OF SHOTS PER MINUTE in the Minnesota game, since he played 34 minutes he would have attempted 14 shots.....Low and behold he attempted 14 shots. Jok played 36 min. Vs Penn. St. and if he took his normal shots per minute vs Penn St. he would have taken 14.9 shots, and he took 15 shots.

So basically you are completely and totally full of sh!t. Jok isn't putting up any more shots per minute than he has all B1G season long. Not only that, Pete was way more efficient in his Minnesota and Penn St. games. Pete avg. 18.6 PPG in B1G play, he scored 27 and 28 PPG vs Minny and Penn. St. while attempting just 3.8 more shots than his per game Avg. (which was already explained by the amount of minutes played).

According to you, those 3.8 "extra" shots hurt the team, made the offense "stagnant". Yet somehow those 3.8 extra shots lead to 17.8 more points over those two game.

You are either the dumbest BB fan on the planet, or you are a Clown troll. My guess is you are both actually, because Clown fan = dumb BB fan. Pete was EXTREMELY efficient vs Minny and Penn. St., far more efficient than he has been all B1G season long.
 
Last edited:
deanvogs said:
In 14 B1G games to date, Pete is averaging 12.6 shots per game while averaging 30.5 minutes played per B1G game. That amounts to .41 shots per minute for Jok.

This means that if Jok took the EXACT SAME AMOUNT OF SHOTS PER MINUTE in the Minnesota game, since he played 34 minutes he would have attempted 14 shots.....Low and behold he attempted 14 shots. Jok played 36 min. Vs Penn. St. and if he took his normal shots per minute vs Penn St. he would have taken 14.9 shots, and he took 15 shots.

So basically you are completely and totally full of sh!t. Jok isn't putting up any more shots per minute than he has all B1G season long. Not only that, Pete was way more efficient in his Minnesota and Penn St. games. Pete avg. 18.6 PPG in B1G play, he scored 27 and 28 PPG vs Minny and Penn. St. while attempting just 3.8 more shots than his per game Avg. (which was already explained by the amount of minutes played).

According to you, those 3.8 "extra" shots hurt the team, made the offense "stagnant". Yet somehow those 3.8 extra shots lead to 17.8 more points over those two game.

You are either the dumbest BB fan on the planet, or you are a Clown troll. My guess is you are both actually, because Clown fan = dumb BB fan. Pete was EXTREMELY efficient vs Minny and Penn. St., far more efficient than he has been all B1G season long.
Click to expand...
Numbers don't lie. Well done. Having PGs that aren't scoring threats is a bigger deal to me than Jok. The bench not playing as well than they had earlier is a bigger deal. Woodys offense being inconsistent doesn't help. Jok is the one player that's pulling more than his own on this team. For anyone to be directing him with much blame just don't get it or is trolling point blank...
 
Numbers can lie. Remember when we got dominated by Nebraska this year in football ad still won? Just because the number of shots Jok takes are consistent doesn't mean he's taking them in the same way.
 
WestCoastHawk said:
Numbers can lie. Remember when we got dominated by Nebraska this year in football ad still won? Just because the number of shots Jok takes are consistent doesn't mean he's taking them in the same way.
Click to expand...

You are right, I mean he is taking the same number of shots, but scoring almost 10 PPG more on those shots.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top