First time all season we saw a True 8 player rotation..

HawkPrdatr40

HawkPrdatr40

Well-Known Member
The 3 off the bench that put in the most work. We needed to see this much sooner than today, but I will take it and hope it continues..

Starters + the 3:
Ogelsby: 25 Minutes
Gabe: 21 Minutes
Uthoff: 15 minutes

The spot duty went to McCabe - 7 minutes and Clemmons- 3 minutes.
 
HawkPrdatr40 said:
The 3 off the bench that put in the most work. We needed to see this much sooner than today, but I will take it and hope it continues..

Starters + the 3:
Ogelsby: 25 Minutes
Gabe: 21 Minutes
Uthoff: 15 minutes

The spot duty went to McCabe - 7 minutes and Clemmons- 3 minutes.
Click to expand...

Yep. Would you agree that the bench (Uthoff, Olseani, JO, and McCabe) + Marble made the run in the 1st half to give the Hawks a 6 point lead. It was a nice little spurt and then the starters came back in, lost the lead a bit, then exploded for the 13 point lead. It might be a baby step towards the starters playing a bit more and the bench used for energy.
 
It seems I just started a thread like this after the IU loss, something about starters needing more minutes and mainly playing starters plus two guys, which would be Oglesby and Uhtoff. Marble and Gesell did almost all the PG work.

It must be that Fran did read my emails to him, LOL.

And as others have said and me also, Mike Gesell got some more minutes.
 
Ha, posted something similar without seeing this post. The first half rotations were ideal IMO. Fran lost his way a bit in the 2nd but then got the right group on the floor.

I'm wondering if this has hindered our defense as well. Have had some lineup looks this last week we haven't seen all year and wondered if this was leading to poor defensive rotations, matchup breakdowns etc. Basabe back plus shorter bench will hopefully pick our defense up. There was a stretch in the first half our d intensity/length was causing major issues.
 
I hate to rain on the parade but this is not why we won. I'll jump out of this thread and you can all say I'm wrong. No worries!
 
WindsorHawk said:
I hate to rain on the parade but this is not why we won. I'll jump out of this thread and you can all say I'm wrong. No worries!
Click to expand...


That makes sense jump into thread tell everyone they are wrong and jump out give no reasoning, guess that makes sense. So with that said going to say your wrong and only because you didn't tell us why we won. :)
 
Last edited:
And yet Iowa struggled to beat Purdue = deep run in NCAA.

Yiiiiiiiiiiiiikes.
 
While I agree the shorter bench can work, I don't believe it is the complete answer. I thought the "line change" rotation used most of the year was a problem. Sure, the 2nd unit came in and produced a few runs, but for the most part it seemed to be a restart. Why not sub one or two guys at a time? Actually rotate through the bench instead of a mass substitution. Keep the hot hand in. Only pull starters due to fatigue, fouls, injury, etc. This would allow the team to stay somewhat fresh without changing the flow and also create different lineup combinations.
Just my two cents
 
big10er said:
While I agree the shorter bench can work, I don't believe it is the complete answer. I thought the "line change" rotation used most of the year was a problem. Sure, the 2nd unit came in and produced a few runs, but for the most part it seemed to be a restart. Why not sub one or two guys at a time? Actually rotate through the bench instead of a mass substitution. Keep the hot hand in. Only pull starters due to fatigue, fouls, injury, etc. This would allow the team to stay somewhat fresh without changing the flow and also create different lineup combinations.
Just my two cents
Click to expand...
two cents or too much sense.

I agree and this does make sense to me.

But to be fair to Fran, if my math is correct, he has won 9 more games in the big ten this season than I have in my entire career.
 
Let's not forget he had to give extra minutes the previous 3 games due to the fact we were playing 4 times in 8 days. I still blame that Indy fiasco on our skid. 1 game in 14 days killed us...let's hope we get our legs and mojo back for the most important stretch of the season
 
patmyne said:
Let's not forget he had to give extra minutes the previous 3 games due to the fact we were playing 4 times in 8 days. I still blame that Indy fiasco on our skid. 1 game in 14 days killed us...let's hope we get our legs and mojo back for the most important stretch of the season
Click to expand...

???

The fact that he shorten it was pretty telling especially since today, was that 4th game in 9 days.
 
HawkPrdatr40 said:
???

The fact that he shorten it was pretty telling especially since today, was that 4th game in 9 days.
Click to expand...

I meant since this was the end of that stretch we could play extended minutes today. I think we saw more bench minutes the last 3 because of the stretch we were in. Hopefully today's minutes are what we are gonna see here on out.
 
woodyk1 said:
Yep. Would you agree that the bench (Uthoff, Olseani, JO, and McCabe) + Marble made the run in the 1st half to give the Hawks a 6 point lead. It was a nice little spurt and then the starters came back in, lost the lead a bit, then exploded for the 13 point lead. It might be a baby step towards the starters playing a bit more and the bench used for energy.
Click to expand...

Actually in the 1st half the bench was really only plus 2. During the the span of time that Uthoff, oglesby, and olaseni were in in the 1st half the plus minus stat was us by 2.
 
Foval21 said:
Actually in the 1st half the bench was really only plus 2. During the the span of time that Uthoff, oglesby, and olaseni were in in the 1st half the plus minus stat was us by 2.
Click to expand...

Actually, I was only referring to the time the 4 bench players (as mentioned) + Marble was playing. They went from tied to getting a 6 point lead (score was 9-9 when it started, then 26-20 when ended). This included Uthoff's dunk and JO's pass to Gabe for another dunk. Then, White came back in ending that stretch. As some have mentioned previously, individual plus/minus can be tough to judge. Sometimes, it would be nice to see the plus/minus as a unit on the floor.
 
I am in complete agreement that the 'rotation' must be addressed.

A. After 30 games, the players are who they are. You are not going to see any statistically different performances than what they've already demonstrated. Marble = Marble stats, Jok = Jok performance, and so forth. Expecting anything further development in the last 3 wks is foolish.

B. The experimenting is over. No more Jok and Clemmons in the back court together, in their 1st action of the game, in the last 5mn, in a game Iowa is behind in. No more McCabe at the #4. These experiments should be concluded and Fran should not be experimenting with novel or failed ideas now.

C. Fran now must; Set the player rotation template before the game, explain player expectations in this game for their role, and know exactly what player combinations and player 'packages' he expects to use and in what situations he plans to use them. It should be clear to the players and it should be some what obvious for the learned fan base to ascertain.

In suumary: now is the time for Fran to step up and lead. He must know say this is your role, this I'd how we are going to use you, and this isnhow we are goingnto move forward. I do not agree with his comment that was something like "the game dictates the player playing time". There are some minor in-game circumstances that require a tweak to the game plan, however, the playing rotations should be, the player rotations. The business of playing guys 8-10mn the 1st half and then 1min the 2nd, or inserting new players to the gm in the 2nd half late for 2mn brings more disruption than positive outcomes.

It is up to Fran to lead this team thru the last stretch of the season and how he decides to use his nice tool box will be critical and interesting to watch.
 
Meh, I dont really buy what the OP is selling.

At Minnesota Iowa played 11 guys, which includes Darius Stokes logging 0 official minutes when he was put in the game at the end to foul. The top 8 guys that night played 189 of the 200 possible minutes for Iowa or 94.5% of the available minutes.

Yesterday against Purdue Iowa played 10 guys. The top 8 guys played 190 of the possible 200 minutes for Iowa or 95% of the available minutes.
 
Clemmons and Jok only get spot minutes...Jok rarely. I think it is crucial for Clemmons to get a few minutes in case Marble or Gesell goes down with an injury and he has to play...our only other option at the point.

As I have been saying all year...the 10 players minus Jok should get in the game and see which guys are playing well. It has been a 7 or 8 man rotation almost every game this year. It's not the same 7 or 8 each game. There's no way of knowing if a player is poised for a big game if he never sees the floor. I really don't think yesterday's game was much different than most others this year.
 
"...At Minnesota Iowa played The top 8 guys that night played 189 of the 200 possible minutes....
Yesterday against Purdue Iowa played The top 8 guys played 190 of the possible 200 minutes for Iowa or 95% of the available minutes..."

At MN, had Basabe been available there would have been 9 players.

Vs purdue, McCabe only gets 7mins, are you saying he is not in top 8 players?
 
Here are the percentage of available minutes that the top 8 in the rotation played in Iowa's B1G games this year:

Nebraska- 87%
@Wisconsin- 90%
NU- 86%
@OSU- 91%
Minnesota- 90%
@Michigan- 94%
@NU- 83.5%
MSU- 88.9%
@Illinois- 88.5%
OSU- 90.5%
Michigan- 90%
@PSU- 95%
Wisconsin- 97%
@Minnesota- 94.5%
@Indiana- 91.5%
Purdue- 95%

So 8 guys have played a huge majority of Iowa's minutes since B1G play started, a larger number than even I expected to see. I would agree with the OP if he would have said that Iowa finally played the correct 8 guys a majority of the minutes yesterday, the 5 starters plus Uthoff, Gabe and Oglesby off the bench.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top