Gatens is a GREAT HAWK

CAARHawk said:
After reviewing your post about watching all that Iowa Basketball and being born in 1945, I was intrigued. So I looked at your bio and it said you have a PH.D. and were a school Superintendent. I find this interesting because your posts don't come off as particularly academic to me. If you look at my comments, they are based on actual data.

While some see any comments I make that are not entirely positive about the program as whining, or just trying to take an alternate perspective, you will see that I refer to observable data to support my observations.

I expect the tavern hawk and undergrad crowd to come back with poorly supported emotional appeals, ad populum and ad hominem appeals, and verbal aggression such as, "you are a waste of food." But, I would expect a coherent well-supported rebuttal from someone with your credentials.

So, let me go back to my main points.
1) Matt is not in the top ten in points, rebounds, or assists.
2) Matt has not been on all-conference first, second, or third teams.
3) There have been documented personality issues within the team and program during Matt's tenure and there are just not many documented instances that indicate Matt has assumed a leadership role with respect to team morale or development of younger players. Not saying it doesn't happen, but I would expect there would be more documented instances if that was a particular strong suit.

Conclusion: The data does not indicate that Matt should be placed in the category of Hawkeye greats.

Now, do you have an actual argument with support that can address my conclusion and supporting evidence?
Click to expand...
Did you watch the game tonight? WTF?
 
CAARHawk said:
I wouldn't say 30 points a game. That is a completely unreasonable number, but asking that the player be top 10 in the conference in rebounding, scoring, or assists seems reasonable. Or that he made one of the all-conference first second or third teams two or more times.

Listen, as I said, there is a lot about Matt which is highly commendable. Without Matt over the last four years things are even more dismal than they have been for Iowa basketball. While other players had more individual notable seasons than Matt during his tenure at Iowa, he is the one that stuck it out and continued to perform on a consistent basis. We owe him a debt of gratitude, that is definite.

I just don't put him in the group of Hawkeye greats such as Marble, BJ, Acie, Street, Andre, Ronnie Lester, Freddy Brown, Stokes, Nelson, and the like.

Or even in the group with Brunner, Horner, Oliver, Haluska and Reggie, who were multiple all conference performers, but who I suspect the old timers wouldn't put in the first group.

It might just be a testament about how bad Iowa has been in the last four years that we are even having this conversation.
Click to expand...

Just thought I'd bump this little gem....
 
CAARHawk said:
After reviewing your post about watching all that Iowa Basketball and being born in 1945, I was intrigued. So I looked at your bio and it said you have a PH.D. and were a school Superintendent. I find this interesting because your posts don't come off as particularly academic to me. If you look at my comments, they are based on actual data.

While some see any comments I make that are not entirely positive about the program as whining, or just trying to take an alternate perspective, you will see that I refer to observable data to support my observations.

I expect the tavern hawk and undergrad crowd to come back with poorly supported emotional appeals, ad populum and ad hominem appeals, and verbal aggression such as, "you are a waste of food." But, I would expect a coherent well-supported rebuttal from someone with your credentials.

So, let me go back to my main points.
1) Matt is not in the top ten in points, rebounds, or assists.
2) Matt has not been on all-conference first, second, or third teams.
3) There have been documented personality issues within the team and program during Matt's tenure and there are just not many documented instances that indicate Matt has assumed a leadership role with respect to team morale or development of younger players. Not saying it doesn't happen, but I would expect there would be more documented instances if that was a particular strong suit.

Conclusion: The data does not indicate that Matt should be placed in the category of Hawkeye greats.

Now, do you have an actual argument with support that can address my conclusion and supporting evidence?
Click to expand...
Caarhawk, are you familiar with the Pomeroy Ratings? Pomeroy presents the most scientific approach on college basketball in the country.

Gatens is rated the 41st best offensive player in the country. That is out of 345 teams and probably 4000 players.

That is the ultimate scientific argument and conclusion. Gatens is a great player and you are 100% wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top