Iowa @ Iowa State (Basketball)

[hawkfan33]

You just dont seem to understand what a troll is. A troll by definition is someone whose primary objective is to say inflammatory things just to stir up the pot. When someone from HN goes to CF and just spouts off a bunch of trash talk and never wants to actually discuss their opinion, they get booted. There are several great posters from here over there who have little issue discussing things like adults and have never been banned. Its common sense.

What did 'Hawkdog' say over there to get banned? I read through the thread and he never said anything inflammatory, he just expressed an opinion and was banned for it. He also was subject to a lot of personal attacks over there. There is just a lot of thin skin over there, you can't deny that.

 

[HawkeyeBasket]

Ejim will be the most athletic player on the court in this game, he looked good against White at the WUG today. We won't be able to stop Niang, they most likely won't be able to stop Marble. I think this game comes down to who shoots better from 3, both teams are going to be relying on unproven or previously inconsistent shooters.

It should be an exciting game!

 

[Cydkar]

It should be an exciting game!

This. End thread.

 

[slickwillard]

What did 'Hawkdog' say over there to get banned? I read through the thread and he never said anything inflammatory, he just expressed an opinion and was banned for it. He also was subject to a lot of personal attacks over there. There is just a lot of thin skin over there, you can't deny that.

Not sure on that one. Something felt off about his posting, but overall if he was trolling it was weak sauce. I didnt follow a whole lot of it honestly.

 

[hawkfan33]

Not sure on that one. Something felt off about his posting, but overall if he was trolling it was weak sauce. I didnt follow a whole lot of it honestly.

"Something felt off" yeah he was just giving a different point of view, but like I said CF is a very sensitive bunch. Not so much overe here as evidenced by you still being here.

 

[slickwillard]

"Something felt off" yeah he was just giving a different point of view, but like I said CF is a very sensitive bunch. Not so much overe here as evidenced by you still being here.

But Im not trolling and neither are many hawk fans over there. There are certainly examples on both sites to what you speak, but it's not the norm.

 

[Hawknigh]

I think that the two boards should create a real physical traveling trophy. The winning board mod (Jon Miller for us) would maintain physical possession and a photo of the trophy provided by the winner (in an appropriate setting, of course) would have to be pinned to the top of both basketball forums until the next SEASON.

There would need to be a timeline for getting it done on time including a fundraiser, design submissions, design votes (I cannot imagine a fair voting, balanced mechanism), and manufacture.

This is my great idea and I support it.

Or maybe just have a Cy-Hawk trophy symbol on the home page of the website that must show the logo of the team who won the most recent head-to-head competition in any sport.

 

[YellowSnow]

Well first let me say that I don't necessarily agree with Law's prediction that Fred will bounce for the NBA anytime soon. I'd say the possibility of that happening is pretty slim, but if he continues to improve Iowa State's program then eventually he'd have a shot. At his age, it would not be a shocker to me if he ended up trying it.

I don't necessarily think there is a "problem" with Hoiberg's strategy either. Clearly it is working. It's more so that I think Fran's strategy is going to start producing better results for the long term. I'll explain why. For one thing it is my opinion that the quality of transfers Fred's bringing in has declined. We'll see, but if that proves to be the case then it's pretty self explanatory how that will effect the team on the court. That's short term though. Maybe it will pick back up. What Fred is doing is getting his teams to the tournament. You can't argue with that. However, there are two main reasons I think Fran's strategy will end up making Iowa a more successful program than Iowa State:

1. Defense - Both Fred and Fran focus on scoring a lot of points. They employ different strategies to do so, but their goal is the same. The main difference between the two coaches to me is that whatever Fran is doing it's clear his teams are playing better defense. I'm not going to say Fred doesn't focus on it as much as Fran does because I don't know that. What I do know is that at this point if you have any sort of basketball IQ you can tell Iowa shows more defensive effort on the court than Iowa State does. If the defensive efforts remain the same and Iowa continues to improve offensively, which it has, then they are going to get better long term results.

2. Team Chemistry - Bringing in transfers year after year can have a major effect on team chemistry. Some years it will work better than others. It depends on the guys on the team and the guys coming in. It's a wild card. If a younger player has worked his *** off to earn playing time just to have a transfer come in and take his minutes that affects more than just his attitude. I don't want to write a novel here. I think you get the idea. Fran is doing things the opposite way. Will he bring in a transfer if it is a major need? Of course he will. However, for the most part he has built the team from the ground up and by the time these guys are juniors and seniors they will have played a ton of basketball together. That isn't something that can be taught. Their cohesion will show on the court, and usually that translates into converting W's.

I think your point number two is a really good one. That concerns me as well to some degree. Monte Morris was asked by Travis Hines of the Ames Tribune after a CCL game recently how he felt about Hoiberg bringing Kane in (to play point). I'm paraphrasing, but Morris said he was a little disappointed but didn't know how the minutes would work out so he didn't really have an opinion on it.

That said... Fran is currently recruiting over players already on your roster as I type this. What difference does it make if the guy to come in is a stud freshmen or transfer? You guys would take Ulis in a heartbeat. That would mean Clemmons goes to the bench next year, right? After all, if you guys can land Ulis, he'd be the best true point guard on your team. Do you have an issue with that if Clemmons gets upset because of it? Probably not i'd guess. How will you feel when Oglesby doesn't play much next year because Jok shoots the 3 better (which he does by way)?

Why is it bad to recruit over players with transfers but not with other freshmen? In both cases feelings get hurt just the same.

 

[hawkfan33]

But Im not trolling and neither are many hawk fans over there. There are certainly examples on both sites to what you speak, but it's not the norm.

You're absolutely a troll. I could pick out 20 examples of you trolling just by looking at your most recent posts page. LOL get the **** out of here with this I'm a not a troll nonsense.

 

[YellowSnow]

YellowSnow, Cydkar. I was posting as Hawkdog on CyFan and am banned. same email but decided to make sure they know who I was rooting for. I was banned for trolling? is this typical for CyFan? I don't understand the thin skin as you guys are pretty much doing the same over here as I did there..... weird stuff in that part of the state I guess

Do you think Cydkar and I are trolling ?

I remember you over there and don't recall anything ban-worthy you did. Maybe email a mod and ask for specifics? I don't know.

What i want to know is which one of you guys is allfourcy on CyFan. That dude made it almost 200 posts before being outed. That is a pretty good job.

 

[ddiction]

I think your point number two is a really good one. That concerns me as well to some degree. Monte Morris was asked by Travis Hines of the Ames Tribune after a CCL game recently how he felt about Hoiberg bringing Kane in (to play point). I'm paraphrasing, but Morris said he was a little disappointed but didn't know how the minutes would work out so he didn't really have an opinion on it.

That said... Fran is currently recruiting over players already on your roster as I type this. What difference does it make if the guy to come in is a stud freshmen or transfer? You guys would take Ulis in a heartbeat. That would mean Clemmons goes to the bench next year, right? After all, if you guys can land Ulis, he'd be the best true point guard on your team. Do you have an issue with that if Clemmons gets upset because of it? Probably not i'd guess. How will you feel when Oglesby doesn't play much next year because Jok shoots the 3 better (which he does by way)?

Why is it bad to recruit over players with transfers but not with other freshmen? In both cases feelings get hurt just the same.

Assuming everyone stays healthy, I doubt Clemmons will be a starter either of the next two years whether Ulis joins the team or not. And frankly I doubt Oglesby will take offense to anyone on the team leapfrogging him given his awful three-point percentage last season. I doubt either of them came to the team with delusions that the starting job was guaranteed to them for four years. A heavily recruited guy like Adam Woodbury might have been sweet-talked a little more with promises of playing time. After this season, before AW's junior year, if Fran brings in a stud juco big man and sends AW to the bench, then AW might have a reason to wish he'd committed somewhere else.

But to some degree you do have to recruit over guys if the talent on your roster needs upgrading. Izzo and Self don't have to do that... their teams are always full of four and five star guys, and recruits don't need to be promised they'll start as freshmen in order to want to play for them. Hoiberg and McCaffery both have programs on the rise, and a few hurt feelings is sometimes the cost of getting to the next level. You've just got to be a charismatic enough coach to get the kids to buy into the team concept and forget about their minutes.

 

[lightning1]

Everyone always thinks their team is the best but what they are saying is laughable. Hopefully Kane and Thomas doesn't disappoint since they have such high hopes for them.

Thomas is not going to be a player that can create off of the dribble. I saw the high light reels. Never saw him create his own shot against anything resembling another D-1 guard.

 

[BryceC]

Thomas is not going to be a player that can create off of the dribble. I saw the high light reels. Never saw him create his own shot against anything resembling another D-1 guard.

I am not sure that will be his role anyway. He'll be like christopherson IMO.

 

[Hawkstrat]

I think your point number two is a really good one. That concerns me as well to some degree. Monte Morris was asked by Travis Hines of the Ames Tribune after a CCL game recently how he felt about Hoiberg bringing Kane in (to play point). I'm paraphrasing, but Morris said he was a little disappointed but didn't know how the minutes would work out so he didn't really have an opinion on it.

That said... Fran is currently recruiting over players already on your roster as I type this. What difference does it make if the guy to come in is a stud freshmen or transfer? You guys would take Ulis in a heartbeat. That would mean Clemmons goes to the bench next year, right? After all, if you guys can land Ulis, he'd be the best true point guard on your team. Do you have an issue with that if Clemmons gets upset because of it? Probably not i'd guess. How will you feel when Oglesby doesn't play much next year because Jok shoots the 3 better (which he does by way)?

There is a difference between competition and cutthroat. Fred cleared room for his latest reclamation project by taking away a scholarship from a guy that already signed his LOI (I guess he took away the promise of a scholarship), trying to compare that to a freshman earning minutes is silly.

If Clemmons or Gesell get bent out of shape by a freshman, that's on them. If Fran brings in a guy that is fresh off of being kicked off of his old school, I empathize with the player.

 

[sportstalent]

I'm beginning to think that Fred just isn't going to bring in a FR who isn't a top 100 type player. He is satisfied with finding JUCO's or transfers if he strikes out on the top 100. Fran is fine moving down his list onto other player like White, Clemmons, Olesani, etc.

If you think about it, this makes sense. Fran was at Mid Majors, and is used to looking for potential in players. Fred has an NBA background, and he wants obvious talent, and he will fill in his roster like free agents if he can't get the top 100 type talent.

Sorry, but this is not a true statement as most of his FR recruits have been Top 150 type players.

 

[sportstalent]

Thomas is not going to be a player that can create off of the dribble. I saw the high light reels. Never saw him create his own shot against anything resembling another D-1 guard.

Highlight reels are perfect...

 

[sportstalent]

DeAndre Kane spit on an opposing fan and led the NCAAs in technical fouls one season. The MSU players were kicked off of their former teams.

I don't know anything about Kane, but was well informed on the MSU players and really it was a rude awakening for both players. Their sense of entitlement was more than Izzo was going to put up with. Did they have issues at ISU? If not, then no huge risk. White is the biggest risk that Fred took a chance on, but there were a few others after him as well, I am guessing Fred's NBA experience in Minnesota helped him get White.

It is funny people throwing stones at ISU for taking transfers, until it fails and ISU stops going to the NCAA tournament just keep throwing those stones. Sometimes a change of scenery is a good thing for a player. Sometimes going to jail and then bailing on the school that jumped through hoops to get you on campus speaks more to a player's character than to ones that change schools and have no further issues...keep tossing them stones though.

 

[ForeverIowan]

I know if I got handled easily by a team last year that returns almost everyone, and then lost 5 of my top players, I would be uber confident as well.

Yeah I mean the last time the Hawks came into Ames and played a relatively new lineup it went pretty well for them didn't it? It isn't like they were down by 20+ at halftime. Oh that's right they were. What was ISU's starting lineup for that game? Two returning players and three first year players.

G - Christopherson (senior)
G - Allen (first year transfer)
G - Babb (first year transfer)
F - Ejim (sophomore)
F - White (first year transfer)

ISU's starting lineup this year will consist of at least two returning players in Ejim (senior) and Niang (sophomore). My guess would be early in the year another senior will be starting in Palo. So that is more experience in the starting lineup than 2011-2012 matchup. Yeah though I'm pretty fearful the NIT power Hawks are going to roll into one of the toughest road environments in the country and embarrass Iowa State.

 

[sportstalent]

I don't understand that comment unless it was a typo and you meant the opposite (which I suspect since it seems to contradict the other things you said). Rankings mean everything until players hit the floor, then the rankings drop in importance very quickly as the player accumulates D1 experience, then the rankings mean nothing. For big men the rankings probably stay important a little longer since they don't usually develop as quickly and see limited action as freshmen.

No contradiction there, rankings are an indicator, but not the end all for what that player is going to be until that player actually plays. Experts and fans are really the only people that get all excited about them. Some players, obviously like the limelight, but that is expected.

 

[sportstalent]

Disagree with your last statement. White and Marble are anomalies in college basketball, not the rule. College basketball, more so than any other sport, is dominated by the top recruits.

Of the ten players who were selected to 1st or 2nd team All-America in 2013, only Olynyk and McDermott were not top 150 recruits. Six of the players (Porter, Withey, Smart, Zeller, Plumlee, McLemore) were top 50-60 recruits.

In 2012, only McDermott and Isaiah Canaan were not top 150 recruits. Again, six of the players (Anthony Davis, Kevin Jones, MKG, T. Zeller, Sullinger, T. Robinson) were top 50-60 recruits.

For every one Steph Curry that falls through the cracks, there are 3 or 4 highly recruited players that turn out just as successful. And the results from the NBA draft are even more in favor of the top recruits.

While you make some good points, skim some NBA rosters and look past your starting five and in some cases top 3 guys and you may see another story. The draft is all about potential, just like the rankings, so it makes sense that there is a trend there as well. Here is the other thing; there are about 25 or so 5* players each year and 64 players drafted, or something. There is a pretty good chance that players ranked high will get drafted because as I said, drafting for potential.

There are plenty of flops out there of those top players, it is no secret, but again, take a look at some rosters and look back at rankings. Just look at guys that have been in the NBA at least 5 yrs, it paints a better picture. High draft picks that fizzle get at least that many years.