Is Iowa Better Without Tyler Cook?

[NorthKCHawk]

I like Koralakers take the best so far. We will be different.

But, while I was hoping Tyler might decide to finish out his eligibility, I am excited about the team's dynamics without him. My sense is that if Tyler came back this team would be largely the same, which means a very good team, but perhaps with a Round of 32 type ceiling. With Tyler leaving, it does give more space for others to step in and perhaps enough oxygen to grow. Tyler was not a particularly good defender or rebounder. Does a tough nose Ryan Kreiner bring a edgier attitude to the starting line-up -- giving us more grit as a team? Or, does Nunge live up to the red shirt season hype and come in and start to blossom as a power/stretch 4?

I think it safe to say we will have less turnovers, free throws, dunks and missed dunks without Tyler. So, there is good and bad there.

 

[eyekwah]

I would say Iowa is neither better or worse with TC leaving. Iowa played a lot of minutes with TC on the bench with two fouls in many games. He has or had his strong points, but he was weak as a shooter. I did not see him take bad shots, most were within 10 feet of the basket. I do think that team defense will not change with him gone unless a player or two can emerge as a defensive leaders. It was the one ingredient that both Virginia and Texas Tech had that Iowa did not have.

 

[ArvadaHawk]

Boy...the regular contributors are sure setting a great example about not dissing players. Even asking this question is a dis to Tyler Cook. How is it not? I'll bet Tyler Cook thinks Iowa is better with him. Question...if you were playing a pick up game, who would you take? Tyler Cook or Ryan Kreiner/Cordell Pemsl? I'm taking Tyler Cook.

with the way cook was utilized, iowa's offense was out of sync, often, because cook didn't thrive as a stretch 4. cook had his best games when he played in the post. iowa will be a better offense without the stretch 4 cook, but not better without the low post cook.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

Just like we were going to be better without Peter Jok?

No. Cook may have holes in his game but I'd rather have him than not.

 

[HaydenHawk56]

I'll bet you however much you want that they shoot a higher percentage on dunks next year.

Ah, no need to bet PC. You are probably right. The players will be freed up to dunk more since they will not have to worry about Tyler traveling with the ball and clanking shot after shot the other percentages of the time.

 

[HawkGold]

Iowa will be more successful without Cook. It's not because I hate TC. Jon and Steve said it much more eloquently than I can. I highly suggest you give it a listen. Very insightful and well though out.
Basically, because of the kind of player TC is, he needs the ball a lot. The problem is, he isn't very efficient outside of 7-8' from the basket. Teams know this and force him out by crowding our guards. So he has to come out to 15' to get the ball. Then he has to dribble his way in. He isn't good at that and turns it over way too much. This team will be better off relying on JBo, Weiskamp, Moss (if he's back) and Garza.
And BTW, Cook will be much better off moving to the next level. Whatever that may be whether it's Euro ball or another level. He's gone as far as he can go at the collegiate level. I wish him the best and thank him for all he's done for Iowa. Thanks Tyler! Good luck!

You just described the real issue. No pt guard.

 

[meaning]

I like cook as a player, and I wish him the best.

that said, I'm more worried about this team without nick baer. I hope some of his teammates replicate his hustle.

 

[Grady]

Cook seems like a great person, great teammate, good leader. But people forget the Hawks were able to win 2 BTen games early in the BTen season when Cook was out with injury. I'm guessing team turnovers will be down overall next year, partially due to Cook not handling the ball, which will be a an important improvement -- you look at Elite 8 teams and they just don't turn the ball over. Hoops is a numbers game: the question is whether Pemsl/Nunge can replace Cooks' 15 pts/8 rebounds per game. I think most nights they will...or come darn close. Hoops is a match-up game: Cook overpowered some Iowa opponents this year and dominated in a way that neither Pemsl/Nunge will. But Pemsl will bring a nasty attitude toward rebounding that Cook never seemed to develop (rewatch this year's Iowa St game and decide whether Iowa wins that game without Pemsl), and Nunge has the ability to knock down that 10 ft jumper from the top corner of the FT line that Jon talked about where Iowa's bigs receive the ball, which should open up some serious high/low action with Garza. In the end, it will probably be a wash...Iowa will probably win some games next year they wouldn't have if Cook stayed; they'll probably lose some games next year where Cook could have taken advantage of some 1-on-1 matchups. The biggest impact will be the team will shoot fewer FTs, as a previous poster noted. That's probably the biggest negative.

 

[lightning1]

No. We won't be. People don't think of TC as a good defender but rebounding is a defensive stat, for the most part. Whoever takes TC's place is going to have to average at least 5 rebounds with zero turnovers, in order to offset Cook's 7.6 rebounds and 2.8 turnovers. Nobody seems to want to talk about the 2.4 assists per game that TC averaged. People love to rip TC for his turnovers but his assist to turnover ratio (2.4/2.8) is identical to Garza's (.9/1.3). Nobody rips Garza. Cook averages more PPG, RPG and has the identical assist/turnover ratio as Garza and Cook is a much better defender. Yet posters here rip Cook and love Garza. I wonder why that is?

 

[1977Hawkeye]

Cook seems like a great person, great teammate, good leader. But people forget the Hawks were able to win 2 BTen games early in the BTen season when Cook was out with injury. I'm guessing team turnovers will be down overall next year, partially due to Cook not handling the ball, which will be a an important improvement -- you look at Elite 8 teams and they just don't turn the ball over. Hoops is a numbers game: the question is whether Pemsl/Nunge can replace Cooks' 15 pts/8 rebounds per game. I think most nights they will...or come darn close. Hoops is a match-up game: Cook overpowered some Iowa opponents this year and dominated in a way that neither Pemsl/Nunge will. But Pemsl will bring a nasty attitude toward rebounding that Cook never seemed to develop (rewatch this year's Iowa St game and decide whether Iowa wins that game without Pemsl), and Nunge has the ability to knock down that 10 ft jumper from the top corner of the FT line that Jon talked about where Iowa's bigs receive the ball, which should open up some serious high/low action with Garza. In the end, it will probably be a wash...Iowa will probably win some games next year they wouldn't have if Cook stayed; they'll probably lose some games next year where Cook could have taken advantage of some 1-on-1 matchups. The biggest impact will be the team will shoot fewer FTs, as a previous poster noted. That's probably the biggest negative.

People said the same thing about Jok two years ago when they played well without him. Clearly Iowa was NOT better last year when Jok was gone. Perhaps it's a case of the team being able to win those games despite not having those players, not BECAUSE they didn't have them.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

No. We won't be. People don't think of TC as a good defender but rebounding is a defensive stat, for the most part. Whoever takes TC's place is going to have to average at least 5 rebounds with zero turnovers, in order to offset Cook's 7.6 rebounds and 2.8 turnovers. Nobody seems to want to talk about the 2.4 assists per game that TC averaged. People love to rip TC for his turnovers but his assist to turnover ratio (2.4/2.8) is identical to Garza's (.9/1.3). Nobody rips Garza. Cook averages more PPG, RPG and has the identical assist/turnover ratio as Garza and Cook is a much better defender. Yet posters here rip Cook and love Garza. I wonder why that is?

I'm not sure why our fans do this, but we (as a fan base) seem to have a habit of cannibalizing our own. Other players people said we would be better off without, once they were gone:

Ricky Davis
Luke Recker
Reggie Evans
Devyn Marble
Peter Jok

Add Tyler Cook to the list.

 

[NikeHawk21]

I'm not sure why our fans do this, but we (as a fan base) seem to have a habit of cannibalizing our own. Other players people said we would be better off without, once they were gone:

Ricky Davis
Luke Recker
Reggie Evans
Devyn Marble
Peter Jok

Add Tyler Cook to the list.

Every fan base does this. Four years is a pretty long time (3 in this case with Cook). Also I don’t recall anyone saying that about Marble.

 

[tmess1989]

While it does at times seem like Cook has a skill set that is limited. I will say that most teams probably had him as a key player to watch on defense and he did draw double teams. More than anything I think Iowa did a poor job of spacing the floor when Cook had the ball with good position in the post. It allowed other teams to double team him easier without much risk of a kick out three. That's on the offensive scheme and coaches.

Now the other thing I will say as far as the addition by subtraction theory is that I felt Iowa would be an overall better team after Jok graduated. Often it seemed like we just threw him the ball and watched instead of running an offense. But obviously Iowa was terrible the next year and I was wrong. I do also agree that a lot of Cooks impact on the game was his ability to make a highlight play and get the energy of the team and the crowd up.

Now I can see how if we only lost Cook that maybe we wouldn't see a drop off. But also losing Baer and to a lessor extent Dailey could overall have a negative impact to the win column. If Nunge comes in and is an impact player and Toussaint plays really well, then it may not be noticeable that we lost those three players.

 

[NikeHawk21]

No. We won't be. People don't think of TC as a good defender but rebounding is a defensive stat, for the most part. Whoever takes TC's place is going to have to average at least 5 rebounds with zero turnovers, in order to offset Cook's 7.6 rebounds and 2.8 turnovers. Nobody seems to want to talk about the 2.4 assists per game that TC averaged. People love to rip TC for his turnovers but his assist to turnover ratio (2.4/2.8) is identical to Garza's (.9/1.3). Nobody rips Garza. Cook averages more PPG, RPG and has the identical assist/turnover ratio as Garza and Cook is a much better defender. Yet posters here rip Cook and love Garza. I wonder why that is?

Where to begin with this one.

I guess let’s start with stats. Here is where Cook and Garza compare in several advanced statistical categories on our team this year:

PER:
Garza (1)
Cook (3)

WS/40:
Garza (1)
Cook (4)

BPM:
Garza (3)
Cook (6)

So it’s clear that your analysis left out some stats that favor Garza in comparison. Those would be things like FG%, 3PT%, FT%, etc.

Let’s talk about rebounding, as TC led us there, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he was a great rebounder. One interesting thing I noticed is that Garza was actually the better rebounder than Cook the prior season (rebounding %) or rebounds per 100 possessions. I’m not entirely sure why Garza had such a big drop off there, but quite frankly Cook isn’t really that good of a rebounder in comparison to many of the other forwards in the conference. I noted it in another thread but if you look up rebounding % for other bigs in the conference Cook is well below the top. I think Nunge and Pemsl can replace Cook’s rebounding.

I think it’s pretty easy to see why people have a longer leash with Garza than they do with Cook. Garza is limited athletically but he always plays hard. Cook is a freak of an athlete at 6’9/250 who can jump out of the gym and considers himself an NBA guy, yet most advanced stats favor Garza as a player. Garza also played great in the tournament while Cook struggled mightily.

I wanted Cook to come back to our team, but there are legitimate arguments to be made about how much we will or won’t miss him.

 

[1980HAWKFAN]

I saw a mock draft article where TC ranked 72nd on a 80 man draft board. The article said basically what we have seen from TC. Suspect defense, no shot to speak of( but could develop),turnover prone. His upside was listed as 6'8" with a quick 1st step. If the Hawks have a better record this upcoming year and advance further in the tournament, does that mean we are better off without him. I say no. Each year the team is somewhat different and if we upgrade at the point guard position that might be enough to improve this team. What the Hawks do or don't do next year will have nothing to do with TC not being there.

 

[lightning1]

Where to begin with this one.

I guess let’s start with stats. Here is where Cook and Garza compare in several advanced statistical categories on our team this year:

PER:
Garza (1)
Cook (3)

WS/40:
Garza (1)
Cook (4)

BPM:
Garza (3)
Cook (6)

So it’s clear that your analysis left out some stats that favor Garza in comparison. Those would be things like FG%, 3PT%, FT%, etc.

Let’s talk about rebounding, as TC led us there, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he was a great rebounder. One interesting thing I noticed is that Garza was actually the better rebounder than Cook the prior season (rebounding %) or rebounds per 100 possessions. I’m not entirely sure why Garza had such a big drop off there, but quite frankly Cook isn’t really that good of a rebounder in comparison to many of the other forwards in the conference. I noted it in another thread but if you look up rebounding % for other bigs in the conference Cook is well below the top. I think Nunge and Pemsl can replace Cook’s rebounding.

I think it’s pretty easy to see why people have a longer leash with Garza than they do with Cook. Garza is limited athletically but he always plays hard. Cook is a freak of an athlete at 6’9/250 who can jump out of the gym and considers himself an NBA guy, yet most advanced stats favor Garza as a player. Garza also played great in the tournament while Cook struggled mightily.

I wanted Cook to come back to our team, but there are legitimate arguments to be made about how much we will or won’t miss him.

This explains your rational but not everyone else's. You can say that TC isn't really that good of a rebounder but he's better than Garza. Period. I don't give a rip about stats per 40 minutes because Garza either can't stay out of foul trouble long enough to play extended minutes or he isn't in good enough shape to. Your advanced stats are flawed for numerous reasons. Too many to count. I know who the better scorer, better rebounder and better defender is. And the ACTUAL stats support that conclusion. And you and I both know that Cook draws way more defensive attention than Garza does. So, help me quantify that with one of your advanced stats. I'll wait for this explanation. It should be great.

 

[Tierney]

Where to begin with this one.

I guess let’s start with stats. Here is where Cook and Garza compare in several advanced statistical categories on our team this year:

PER:
Garza (1)
Cook (3)

WS/40:
Garza (1)
Cook (4)

BPM:
Garza (3)
Cook (6)

So it’s clear that your analysis left out some stats that favor Garza in comparison. Those would be things like FG%, 3PT%, FT%, etc.

Let’s talk about rebounding, as TC led us there, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he was a great rebounder. One interesting thing I noticed is that Garza was actually the better rebounder than Cook the prior season (rebounding %) or rebounds per 100 possessions. I’m not entirely sure why Garza had such a big drop off there, but quite frankly Cook isn’t really that good of a rebounder in comparison to many of the other forwards in the conference. I noted it in another thread but if you look up rebounding % for other bigs in the conference Cook is well below the top. I think Nunge and Pemsl can replace Cook’s rebounding.

I think it’s pretty easy to see why people have a longer leash with Garza than they do with Cook. Garza is limited athletically but he always plays hard. Cook is a freak of an athlete at 6’9/250 who can jump out of the gym and considers himself an NBA guy, yet most advanced stats favor Garza as a player. Garza also played great in the tournament while Cook struggled mightily.

I wanted Cook to come back to our team, but there are legitimate arguments to be made about how much we will or won’t miss him.

 

[Tierney]

I think its possible that Garza and rebounding might of dropped off when he had the twenty pound tumor removed from his abdomen before the season started. I enjoyed watching Cook, and he is a great athlete, but that doesn't mean he has greater basketball potential than Garza, Nunge, or even Pemsl. Nunge is a guy that has grown and put on thirty pounds since high school. Pemsl is pretty talented, but unfortunately he is injury prone. It will be interesting to see what the three along with Kriener can do next year.

 

[NikeHawk21]

This explains your rational but not everyone else's. You can say that TC isn't really that good of a rebounder but he's better than Garza. Period. I don't give a rip about stats per 40 minutes because Garza either can't stay out of foul trouble long enough to play extended minutes or he isn't in good enough shape to. Your advanced stats are flawed for numerous reasons. Too many to count. I know who the better scorer, better rebounder and better defender is. And the ACTUAL stats support that conclusion. And you and I both know that Cook draws way more defensive attention than Garza does. So, help me quantify that with one of your advanced stats. I'll wait for this explanation. It should be great.

Here is a quick question, why are you looking for a Cook vs Garza debate anyway? One guy is choosing to move on and the other guy is staying. One guy plays the 4 spot and one guy plays the 5. Seems like a silly argument, but as I noted many of the advanced stats do favor Luka Garza as a player. You may choose to ignore advanced stats if you’d like but they are used by many.

Anyway the real question here is whether some combination of Nunge, Pemsl, and Kriener can improve upon what Cook did or would have done.

The logical argument for Nunge would be he provides outside shooting (Cook doesn’t) in theory he will provide shot blocking/ rim protection (Cook doesn’t). Iowa has plenty of scoring, so maybe Nunge providing some defensive presence will be a positive element. Maybe the spacing will look much better for our team on offense.

Again, I would have liked Cook to return so I’m not making that argument, but just pointing out one could be made.

 

[1977Hawkeye]

Every fan base does this. Four years is a pretty long time (3 in this case with Cook). Also I don’t recall anyone saying that about Marble.

I do.

He was accused by some of being a selfish ball hog, etc. Even after digging up stats showing he was one of the better assist guys in the conference, certain folks still insisted he was hurting the team because he shot too much. I can't remember who was saying it, but I distinctly remembering having arguments about it. Maybe it wasn't a very big segment of the fan base, but there were definitely some who were suggesting it.