Ree4
Well-Known Member
Stats also show that CJF has a worse +- as a defender than JBO too, we get it. Some people don't like JBo, this dead horse has been beaten to pieces.
Jack Nunge's minutes
- Thread starter VTHawk
- Start date
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
Big difference is CJF isn’t starting at point or defending the point. CJF has his warts, no question, and his struggles defensively could be why we are seeing more of Murray.
But there is no JBo hate on here.
VTHawk
Well-Known Member
Exactly.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
He's a bigger detriment on defense than JBo statistically, yet it's never brought up. You're saying it's simply because he doesn't play point? I think it's because people don't actually understand basketball.
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
Then bring it up more! I’m saying it’s not brought up because it’s more glaring at the point. You can hide a deficient defender at the 2 a lot easier you can the point. If you understand basketball you would know this.
earlkoppelman
Well-Known Member
Not enough minutes. Lots of Talent.And Tough Hawks. Things will work out! Players on Same Page/Court..
Ree4
Well-Known Member
I'd prefer to not bash our player's shortcomings and look at them as total players, not nitpick their individual skills.
While this may be true in general, the number differential between the two of them would suggest that CJF's defensive deficiency compared to JBo's is not as "hidden" as you seem to suggest. I guess you're referring to the incredibly objective eyeball test?
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
If you cannot have an objective conversation over players ability both positive and negative then these message boards are not for you. Nobody is bashing JBo here, especially not me. I get it, some are such HUGE fans of JBo that he walks on water and can do no wrong so throw objective conversations out the window. He's made some HUGE baskets and is the all time 3 point shooter, so some of it is deserved.
Was not referencing any "eyeball test" but I don't stare at statistics. If you tell me that statistically CJF is worse defensively than JBo then I believe you, I'm just telling you why more people are talking about JBo. I'm sure it doesn't help that there is a Joe Toussaint that comes in and looks (oops, eyeball) good.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
It really doesn't matter in the long run with this team. Fran's going to go with the hot hand which can differ different games. Right now they like to start with the 4 out 1 in to spread the court. This to move the ball around the perimeter with passes to get the defense chasing or dump down into Garza without a lot of bodies. If they double team, Garza can kick it out to the perimeter. It's working so don't change how you start games, unless the competition dictates with personnel. I think there will be games where Nunge has many minutes and might increase more as time goes by.
As you point out, there will be times that Fran will want both in at the same time. The key with Iowa is all the interchangeable players, and players that can come in and hit from the perimeter. They don't have to change their philosophy with different players or hide role players. It's the quality depth they can bring in that is interchangeable. It's really quite impressive actually.
Keegan Murray is a terrific man off the bench as he does everything and affects the game in so many different ways. He's long and active on defense, rebounding, can hit the occasional 3 and can drive the ball. He's kind of classified as a role player but really is a good overall player. He's a great 6th man with his overall game.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
Pretty sure that objectivity is about stats, subjectivity is the eyeball test that I referred to... I'm all for objective conversation, all I've heard for 4 years is "we need a real point guard". It's all I hear from the old donor crowd in IC, grumbling over and over and over. I mean it's fucking obvious that Jordan's defense isn't great. Everyone posts or talks like it's some revelation - like they're the first to notice it. How about coming up with something new?
I'm no blind fanboy of JBo, but I do like him in an Iowa uniform and can appreciate his contributions to the program despite being told continuously that he wasn't good enough. Why is he the focus of so much ire?
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
IMO, because you start talking about JBo and people start getting defensive. Objective conversations go out the window when he is brought up. Like I said, I get it, he tugs at the heart strings a bit in most Hawk fans.
I also like JBo in an Iowa uniform, he's made HUGE contributions to the team. I always felt he would have been a better 2 but Fran was forced to put him at the point because he didn't have any better options. Toussaint is the best true point guard Iowa has had in a while.
Ree4
Well-Known Member
Saying that JBo is "not a true point guard" is an incredibly subjective take. I'd argue that when people start with a subjective take, objective conversations go out the window.
There is a lot of debate around what a true point guard is. The basic definition of a true point guard is that they are supposed to run the court, control the game, and lead the team to a victory. Bohannon does this. I think Connor does it better. I think what some people think is that they have to be a slasher, be quick and be excellent defenders. This is an opinion.
ssckelley
Well-Known Member
Where did I say that? I said JBo would have been better at the 2.
I'm done with this, it's going nowhere.
Go JBo, Go JoeT, and GO HAWKS!
Ree4
Well-Known Member
I didn't say you did, others have for 4 years, which is my point. You said JT is the best true point Iowa has had in years. Why is that? I'd argue Connor is better. Amazing assist to turnover ratio, good defender, great floor general, high basketball IQ, incredibly unselfish player, good free throw shooter, good leader.
I think the potential is there for JT, but he's not there yet.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Jo Bo may lack a bit with defensive speed but he can surely put a lot of pressure on the other team and really spread the offensive floor. Very rarely does a coach get that all-around perfect player. I'll take him on my team any day.
He also has that knack of really stepping up for the big games and loves that atmosphere. Garza does as well which is why it's going to be fun as hell watching them against the Zags on Saturday and seeing how the Zags are going to deal with that. Fun times!
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
I have to agree with the bold above. When Jo Bo was playing true PG a couple seasons ago he had one of the best assist to turnover stat in the NCAA. Along with that one of the better 3 Pt shooting stats in the NCAA as well.
As a coach, that is all one asks for in a true PG: 1) Take care of the ball. 2) Get assists. 3) Play good defense. 4) Score when there.
In that order.
Shooting the 3 is a huge bonus. Being able to drive to the rim is a bonus.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Agree. A more natural 2.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Yea, both those players bring something a little different.
Connor is heady and a coach on the floor if you will. Joe T can do more off the dribble and is quicker.
Joe T has great upside and I think will learn a lot. Kind of like BJ Armstrong progression thru the years.
Fryowa
Administrator
I easily see Connor coaching after he's done playing. He's got his dad's fire, and he's obviously knowledgeable. Doesn't hurt having been a starter at the highest collegiate level and having a dad who was a successful, high-level coach to learn from.
So...
Do we keep Connor on as a GA after he's done, then an assistant, then in 8 years when Fran's ready to retire give Connor the keys for the next 30 years?
Hmmm.......
