Iowa @ Iowa State (Basketball)

tm3308 said:
I just think he's not a starting-caliber player for a Power 6 tourney team. He'd be a very good starter for a lot of mid-majors that'd make the Dance, but in a conference like the Big Ten, he needs to be a role player if the team is truly tourney-worthy, IMO. He's in the right role for him and for the team.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of guys out there that aren't starting caliber type players in Power 6 conferences, but still play very important roles and important minutes. The "not having talent or good enough to play a significant role" is a matter of interpretation. If McCabe plays 10 mpg and busts his butt out there, does that mean to Fran his number of minutes are less significant because White plays 25 mpg. I just don't agree that because he isn't a starting caliber type player that he isn't a significant player.

Look at McGary/Albrecht impact on Michigan in the Final Four. McGary was a regular, but non-starter until the BTT, did that make his contributions lesser throughout the season? Spike is and will be a back-up, but as in the Final Four he showed that he was a reliable player and can have big moments, what the hell is wrong with that? I think we would all agree that Spike would start at a majority of the mid-majors and be an all-conference type player, so what he is doing his thing at Michigan.

McCabe will never be an All-BT type player and I didn't expect him to ever be, but his contributions cannot be negative, which is why I thought he got taken out of the starting lineup and had a short leash for most of the season. Look for a different player this season.
 
sportstalent said:
There are a lot of guys out there that aren't starting caliber type players in Power 6 conferences, but still play very important roles and important minutes. The "not having talent or good enough to play a significant role" is a matter of interpretation. If McCabe plays 10 mpg and busts his butt out there, does that mean to Fran his number of minutes are less significant because White plays 25 mpg. I just don't agree that because he isn't a starting caliber type player that he isn't a significant player.

Look at McGary/Albrecht impact on Michigan in the Final Four. McGary was a regular, but non-starter until the BTT, did that make his contributions lesser throughout the season? Spike is and will be a back-up, but as in the Final Four he showed that he was a reliable player and can have big moments, what the hell is wrong with that? I think we would all agree that Spike would start at a majority of the mid-majors and be an all-conference type player, so what he is doing his thing at Michigan.

McCabe will never be an All-BT type player and I didn't expect him to ever be, but his contributions cannot be negative, which is why I thought he got taken out of the starting lineup and had a short leash for most of the season. Look for a different player this season.
Click to expand...

FFS. I've been saying all along that McCabe has value to this team. But he shouldn't get starter's minutes, which is what David was saying. Zach is better, and so is the team, if he's playing fewer minutes. After about the 15mpg mark, we get diminishing returns. That's not a bad thing, as long as he's not averaging 20+ minutes.
 
tm3308 said:
FFS. I've been saying all along that McCabe has value to this team. But he shouldn't get starter's minutes, which is what David was saying. Zach is better, and so is the team, if he's playing fewer minutes. After about the 15mpg mark, we get diminishing returns. That's not a bad thing, as long as he's not averaging 20+ minutes.
Click to expand...

If he plays next year he has value. Trust your coach. I'll bet my house that he plays and gets the amount of minutes based on his value. It's quite simple.
 
tm3308 said:
FFS. I've been saying all along that McCabe has value to this team. But he shouldn't get starter's minutes, which is what David was saying. Zach is better, and so is the team, if he's playing fewer minutes. After about the 15mpg mark, we get diminishing returns. That's not a bad thing, as long as he's not averaging 20+ minutes.
Click to expand...

No Super Dave said Zach is not talented and should have transfered...FFS
 
sportstalent said:
No Super Dave said Zach is not talented and should have transfered...FFS
Click to expand...

He said Zach isn't talented ENOUGH to play major minutes for a tournament team. As far as I'm concerned, that's a fair statement (if Zach is playing 20+ minutes in a Power 6 conference, his team probably isn't tournament-worthy). I already went after his point regarding the transfer. But his point that fewer minutes for Zach is a good thing, isn't that far off the mark.
 
tm3308 said:
He said Zach isn't talented ENOUGH to play major minutes for a tournament team. As far as I'm concerned, that's a fair statement (if Zach is playing 20+ minutes in a Power 6 conference, his team probably isn't tournament-worthy). I already went after his point regarding the transfer. But his point that fewer minutes for Zach is a good thing, isn't that far off the mark.
Click to expand...

Please define that.

I don't agree with that statement one bit, but it is a matter of interpretation I guess. The only reason Zach wasn't playing more minutes last year is that he just didn't shoot the ball well as he did the previous year. Well and I guess the fact that his fouls per game were the highest of any Iowa player you have a poor combination and one that doesn't equal major playing time.

It isn't like Iowa had a loaded roster last season, Zach just couldn't get out of his own way to have success last season. I have been a big critic of Zach and the things he can't do, but he can shoot the ball well, he has proven it, but he didn't last season. At one point his 2-pt % was lower than his 3-pt % and his 3-pt % was under 30% at the time...yikes.

I don't know how you can define major minutes either, if a player has a role that he maximizes and a team depends on that player to fulfill that role, isn't that major minutes even if said player averages 12 mpg?

It is an ignorant statement because if a coach is trusting a guy to play a role, it is significant/major in my eyes, maybe you don't agree on that and it is okay we just disagree.
 
If someone guaranteed me McCabe would play 30+ min next year in the Iowa State game I would be thrilled.
 
sportstalent said:
Please define that.

I don't agree with that statement one bit, but it is a matter of interpretation I guess. The only reason Zach wasn't playing more minutes last year is that he just didn't shoot the ball well as he did the previous year. Well and I guess the fact that his fouls per game were the highest of any Iowa player you have a poor combination and one that doesn't equal major playing time.

It isn't like Iowa had a loaded roster last season, Zach just couldn't get out of his own way to have success last season. I have been a big critic of Zach and the things he can't do, but he can shoot the ball well, he has proven it, but he didn't last season. At one point his 2-pt % was lower than his 3-pt % and his 3-pt % was under 30% at the time...yikes.

I don't know how you can define major minutes either, if a player has a role that he maximizes and a team depends on that player to fulfill that role, isn't that major minutes even if said player averages 12 mpg?

It is an ignorant statement because if a coach is trusting a guy to play a role, it is significant/major in my eyes, maybe you don't agree on that and it is okay we just disagree.
Click to expand...

You're still missing the point.

His role is significant in its own right. But a player with his skill set is not very efficient if he's playing a lot of minutes. That doesn't, in any way, diminish what he can bring to the table in more conservative minutes. He's more effective for 15-20 minutes than he would be for 20+.

Your problem is that when I say "major minutes," I mean a lot of minutes. You think "major minutes" means significant because of his role. His role is important. But playing him for extensive minutes is asking him to be something more than what he is, which isn't fair to him. He plays his role, which is best confined to less than 20 minutes a game. Asking him to do more than that changes his role.
 
Stewo said:
Don't care to get into a ******* match, but there's no way that Hawk fans actually think that was a good ISU showing. It was probably top 5 worst games of the season for them. Meanwhile, Iowa was on fire. Now, I'm not trying to take credit away from Iowa, but that certainly wasn't the best out of ISU. I think that was very evident as the season wore on.
Click to expand...
I don't think you saw the best out of Iowa in that game.
 
BryceC said:
If someone guaranteed me McCabe would play 30+ min next year in the Iowa State game I would be thrilled.
Click to expand...

If someone guaranteed me that ISU would return only 2 players from last years game, 18 pts, 9 rebounds, and 2 assists.....while Iowa returned 8 players, 78 pts, 30 rebounds, 19 assists, and 9 steals.....I would be thrilled. :D
 
docholihawk said:
I don't think you saw the best out of Iowa in that game.
Click to expand...

This.

Iowa still shot the ball poorly as they did in most games.

Both of the past two seasons it has taken Iowa Sts turned over rosters a while to get accustomed to playing together. It will be the same this year considering their new players this year don't have near the level of previous experience that they have the last two years.

They will probably field a decent team this year again but I would expect another slow start.
 
deanvogs said:
If someone guaranteed me that ISU would return only 2 players from last years game, 18 pts, 9 rebounds, and 2 assists.....while Iowa returned 8 players, 78 pts, 30 rebounds, 19 assists, and 9 steals.....I would be thrilled. :D
Click to expand...

2 of those ISU players that left seemed to be playing for Iowa anyway.
 
This game is pretty easy to map out..... Hawks are going to be a stronger team in the early months of the season because of the number of returning starters. Clones will have boost from playing at home in Ames. This game is going to come down to guard play. Both squads return some solid players in the post but the clones will have an all new guard court. If Fran can get a scheme drawn up to ruffle the feathers of the new ISU guards the hawks will create turnovers and allow guys like white to run the floor and get to the rim. If ISU keeps turnovers town this one will be tight going into the later minutes.
 
Cydkar said:
2 of those ISU players that left seemed to be playing for Iowa anyway.
Click to expand...

That is what happens when you go up against teams that actually play defense. Don't get me wrong, I like watching the Big12 and the pace of the games is much better.....yet not much real defense is played in that league.
 
Cydkar said:
2 of those ISU players that left seemed to be playing for Iowa anyway.
Click to expand...

I assume you are referring to Lucious and Clyburn. But weren't those two guys the ones that you Clone fans had warned us that were going to dominate the game? Clyburn, in particular, was a player that we had no answer for and was way too athletic for any of our slow white guys. I know I was pretty dazzled watching him score zero points and pull down three boards.
 
MisterLucky said:
I assume you are referring to Lucious and Clyburn. But weren't those two guys the ones that you Clone fans had warned us that were going to dominate the game? Clyburn, in particular, was a player that we had no answer for and was way too athletic for any of our slow white guys. I know I was pretty dazzled watching him score zero points and pull down three boards.
Click to expand...

Not me. I was anti-Korie at that time and lukewarm on Clyburn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top