Jarrod Uthoff

[HawkeyeMike23]

Iowa was beaten in 2nd half by 8, playing one of their worst halves of year. Uthoff DNP.

Uthoff's 1st half included o-rebounds, assists, blocks, NO TO, fouls, and did not make mistakes on defense that led to lay ups and points like backdoors, full court run outs for layups, turning ball over in front court for lay up, or getting a blocking call resulting in 3 pt play. Little things like that add to rebound margin, lower FG%, and forcing oppents to foul and getting to the line are unappreciated.

The bigger question is What is his role on this team? It is hard to discern from our vantage point, but I wonder if Uthoff even knows what it is. Take a 18 ft shot and miss it and you get benched for the rest of the game, is what I saw last night. And it hurt Iowa in the 2nd half.

This is from black hearts gold pants....

** A separate article could be written about the four or five defensive lapses Jok made in this game, but they were usually pretty obvious and don't need discussion here. Suffice it to say he's a major defensive liability at this point..."

DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS: HOW IOWA'S DEFENSE FAILED AGAINST ILLINOIS - Black Heart Gold Pants

So Jok is looked at as a 'Major defensive Liability'.... Cn we agree on that?

I also believe that uthoff playing 7-8th most minutes in a strict rotation with those 8 players is the thing to do. I've never disagreed with that concept, mike seems too disagree with that. Playing Jok, as is referenced in this post, because of his obvious defensive problems, as I laid out, and as black hearts clearly corroborate, is something that i argue against.

Good link, but I was told in this very thread that Uthoff "did not make mistakes that led to layups", however the BHGP article contains exhibit 6 includes the following sentence:

But Jarrod Uthoff fails to look around and box out #2 Bertrand, who picks up a deflection off Woodbury and makes a layup.

Not sure who I can trust now?

 

[ibahawkeye]

This is from black hearts gold pants....

** A separate article could be written about the four or five defensive lapses Jok made in this game, but they were usually pretty obvious and don't need discussion here. Suffice it to say he's a major defensive liability at this point..."

DEATH BY A THOUSAND CUTS: HOW IOWA'S DEFENSE FAILED AGAINST ILLINOIS - Black Heart Gold Pants

So Jok is looked at as a 'Major defensive Liability'.... Cn we agree on that?

I also believe that uthoff playing 7-8th most minutes in a strict rotation with those 8 players is the thing to do. I've never disagreed with that concept, mike seems too disagree with that. Playing Jok, as is referenced in this post, because of his obvious defensive problems, as I laid out, and as black hearts clearly corroborate, is something that i argue against.

I don't think there was any disagreement that Jok's short fall is his defense at this point. My point is that Uthoff is not much better.

Jok can spread the floor more on offense to help create some room for Mike and Dev to make plays and is a far better outside shooter than Uthoff. For these reasons, I like Jok.

Again, I don't dislike Uthoff but I think he struggles when you put a smaller, quicker defender on him becuase he can't penetrate and he's too weak to post and so his offensive game is limited. I want Uthoff to back up White at the 4 position next year where he can take advantage of his quickness against the bigger guys and hopefully by his senior yearhe will continue to imporve and add strength and be able to win the starting spot as the 4 when White graduates.

That's the path I see for Uthoff.

 

[kctom]

From my post, #50 in this thread, Im an attempt to be fair and unbiased, I Do address this point..

"...His man shoots 2x and misses (not fouling), and gives up an unlucky o board where the shooter misses everything resulting in air bank that caught all 4 Iowa guys flat footed. Bad luck...."

So, no Mike, this was not missed in my review of the 2 players performance, When reviewed the tape, i didn't see it bounce off Woody, but rather air bank ad go directly to the floor where bertrand picked it up off the ankle tops, had it hit the rim like 99% of shots, and been rebounded above the shoulders, Iowa gets the board. Just bad luck.

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

I don't think there was any disagreement that Jok's short fall is his defense at this point. My point is that Uthoff is not much better.

Jok can spread the floor more on offense to help create some room for Mike and Dev to make plays and is a far better outside shooter than Uthoff. For these reasons, I like Jok.

Again, I don't dislike Uthoff but I think he struggles when you put a smaller, quicker defender on him becuase he can't penetrate and he's too weak to post and so his offensive game is limited. I want Uthoff to back up White at the 4 position next year where he can take advantage of his quickness against the bigger guys and hopefully by his senior yearhe will continue to imporve and add strength and be able to win the starting spot as the 4 when White graduates.

That's the path I see for Uthoff.

I agree with this. I think Uthoff is pretty talented offensively but for whatever reason, he's just playing way too passive and unagressive to be getting major minutes at this point. When he plays timid, he adds almost nothing on the offensive end and he is not a good enough defender for him to be worth playing for long stretches for just his defense alone. I would love to see him come out firing in the BTT, go hard to the rim, he's a long 6'9", try to throw one down over someone like he did in the non-conf instead of driving, stopping, pump faking, getting tied up or falling down like he has been doing. He just looks like a guy who has no confidence in his offensive game at this point.

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

From my post, #50 in this thread, Im an attempt to be fair and unbiased, I Do address this point..

"...His man shoots 2x and misses (not fouling), and gives up an unlucky o board where the shooter misses everything resulting in air bank that caught all 4 Iowa guys flat footed. Bad luck...."

So, no Mike, this was not missed in my review of the 2 players performance, When reviewed the tape, i didn't see it bounce off Woody, but rather air bank ad go directly to the floor where bertrand picked it up off the ankle tops, had it hit the rim like 99% of shots, and been rebounded above the shoulders, Iowa gets the board. Just bad luck.

So you're saying that BHGP article was wrong in it's critique of Uthoff failing to box out there?

 

[kctom]

Nope, you said nothing about Marble. You said playing Jok and JO together was "certainly a contributing factor in Iowa losing the rebounding battle" (this site has a handy feature where you can quote another person's post) and you were wrong.

so mike, Here is my comment re: rebounding, marble, Jok and Oglesby. Post #519, Illinois game thread, you read it, understood it, and then you commented on in in post#520.


Re: *** OFFICIAL*** Iowa v Illinois Game Thread



13 offensive rebounds given up to a terrible offensive rebounding team is where this game was lost. IA #6 IL #224.

Playing marble Marble extended minutes in the 3 spot is a mistake.

Oly/woody only get 36 MN, Basabe only 14, and Uthoff only 8. Iowa used to lead the conference in rebounding margin and offensive boards. That was a winning advantage. Now, with Jok, ac, oglesby, AND marble at the #3 spot, they combine for 2 rebounds in 66 mins and Iowa is Crushed on the boards including 13 offensive boards.

C'mon Fran. Playing Marble at the 3 is a huge misplay of IOWAs competitive advantage. Rebounding. Marble should get 28 mins in #2 and 6 spelling Gesell at #1. Oglesby should get the 12 in spelling marble @#2. Whitey, uthoff and Mel get the minutes rebounding and blocking shots at the #3-4. Iowa will win the rebounding and FT game then.

But playing, Jok, mcacbe, ac, so many minutes and in these bizarre player combinations is just finding another way for Iowa to lose.....


Last edited by kctom; 03-09-2014 at 05:47 AM.

So in recapping, yes you did read post w Marble, and either:

A. You mentally werent able to remember it.
B. You intentionally misled those here by misquoting me

Which is it Mike?

 

[kctom]

Did I misquote you? LOL

"Paying marble Marble extended minutes in the 3 spot is a mistake"

There is the quote. I asked that you go back and read all the posts, you read it, commented on in it,
then chose to 'forget' it for the purposes of, i dont know what.

This is why i asked that we move along in Peace...
and why i prefer now to be drug down to the level of these confrontational discussions w/ LOL and what have you....

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

"Paying marble Marble extended minutes in the 3 spot is a mistake"

There is the quote. I asked that you go back and read all the posts, you read it, commented on in it,
then chose to 'forget' it for the purposes of, i dont know what.

This is why i asked that we move along in Peace...
and why i prefer now to be drug down to the level of these confrontational discussions w/ LOL and what have you....

You just really don't get how the quote function works do you? I posted exactly what you said, you were wrong, admit and move on. TIA.

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

Oglesby and Jok combine for 36 mins at #2, Gesell and AC for 35 mins at point, So if marble played 5 at point and 4 at #2, that left him with 20 mins at the small forward...

Jok and Oglseby were on the floor together for several minutes

"... and Oglseby were on the floor together for several minutes..."

If this is true, it is even more disturbing as neither of these 2 profile out as a #3 player and is certainly a contributing factor in Iowa losing the rebounding battle and in tying in the FT comparator.

But this is a classic example of Fran's substitution strategy, playing both in game at same time.

And it makes even less sense to have Jok and Josh in there, together....

Iowa outrebounded Illinois 5-3 in the 4 and a half minutes Josh and Peter were on the floor together in the first half.

"...Iowa outrebounded Illinois 5-3 in the 4 and a half minutes Josh and Peter were on the floor together in the first half..."

And neither had a rebound....

Plus, this is such a small sample size that it is impossible to draw valid conclusions....

There's the whole sequence for you. I don't need to type something up and edit it, it's all right in the thread for. You weren't talking about Marble brah.

 

[kctom]

Nope, you said nothing about Marble. You said playing Jok and JO together was "certainly a contributing factor in Iowa losing the rebounding battle" (this site has a handy feature where you can quote another person's post) and you were wrong. QUOTE]

Below is comment from Ill game thread in which name marble, and others as reason for rebounding problem, post #520. I see that you commented on this post #521. so you read it, understood it, and was aware of it. Yet above you state i said nothing of Marble.

So either
A. You couldnt recall this post (a real possbility)
B. You chose not to recall this conversation.

which is it Mike?

Re: *** OFFICIAL*** Iowa v Illinois Game Thread



13 offensive rebounds given up to a terrible offensive rebounding team is where this game was lost. IA #6 IL #224.

Playing marble Marble extended minutes in the 3 spot is a mistake.

Oly/woody only get 36 MN, Basabe only 14, and Uthoff only 8. Iowa used to lead the conference in rebounding margin and offensive boards. That was a winning advantage. Now, with Jok, ac, oglesby, AND marble at the #3 spot, they combine for 2 rebounds in 66 mins and Iowa is Crushed on the boards including 13 offensive boards.

C'mon Fran. Playing Marble at the 3 is a huge misplay of IOWAs competitive advantage. Rebounding. Marble should get 28 mins in #2 and 6 spelling Gesell at #1. Oglesby should get the 12 in spelling marble @#2. Whitey, uthoff and Mel get the minutes rebounding and blocking shots at the #3-4. Iowa will win the rebounding and FT game then.

But playing, Jok, mcacbe, ac, so many minutes and in these bizarre player combinations is just finding another way for Iowa to lose.....


Last edited by kctom; 03-09-2014 at 05:47 AM.

 

[kctom]

You just really don't get how the quote function works do you? I posted exactly what you said, you were wrong, admit and move on. TIA.

you deny the conversation on the other thread?

 

[kctom]

you deny the conversation on the other thread?

if you recall the conversation on the other thread, you should understand its context here.

but i do recall you taking the 4 min of play out of context too....

 

[HawkeyeMike23]

Oglesby and Jok combine for 36 mins at #2, Gesell and AC for 35 mins at point, So if marble played 5 at point and 4 at #2, that left him with 20 mins at the small forward...

Jok and Oglseby were on the floor together for several minutes

"... and Oglseby were on the floor together for several minutes..."

If this is true, it is even more disturbing as neither of these 2 profile out as a #3 player and is certainly a contributing factor in Iowa losing the rebounding battle and in tying in the FT comparator.

But this is a classic example of Fran's substitution strategy, playing both in game at same time.

And it makes even less sense to have Jok and Josh in there, together....

Iowa outrebounded Illinois 5-3 in the 4 and a half minutes Josh and Peter were on the floor together in the first half.

you deny the conversation on the other thread?

First of all congrats on nailing the quote function. Good work! Second of all, no I don't remember your post from the Illini game thread, I don't usually memorize the entire game thread and who posted what during it (although I do remember having a discussion with Cliche about me betting the over on the UCLA-Washington game only realizing after I made my bet it was actually UCLA-Washington St). But I'm confused as to why you think that would pertain to this conversation?

 

[hoffahawk]

I think if you expect him to add 15 lbs of muscle in a year you will be disappointed. His frame doesn't seem like one to carry a whole lot of muscle and he weighed 190 lbs in high school. So he's added 18 lbs in 2 years including a year off from playing competitively and I'm sure it's no secret to him that it's needed and been a point of emphasis since he got on a college campus.

 

[kctom]

I remember when my kids would 'conveniently' forget to remember things too....

You were bagging on uthoff's stats in and out of big ten play, then made comment about cutoff, recall now?

That commentary was the genesis for this thread.

 

[Tschroeder13]

Don't bring that weak sauce..

17 minutes against Xavier
18 minutes against Villanova
24 Minutes Notre Dame
17 Minutes #17 Iowa State
16 Minutes #4 Wisconsin
26 Minutes #3 Ohio State

1-5 in those games... so i guess you missed your point

 

[Knight78]

Watch the game again, uthoff's man NEVER once beat him on baseline. Jok yes, uthoff no. he played excellent defense, his 1st time on press caused TO, did you see that?. Jok was the one that had to foul as guys went around him 2x and got toasted backdoors...

True, when they were in man to man defense. When they were in zone (2-3 matchup), Utoff is supposed to cut off the backside cutter until he is at least to the middle of the lane. That never happened. And Jok was not on the baseline of the zone; Ogs was there when both were on the floor at the same time.

 

[kctom]

I didn't see uthoff get beat backside in zone defense, I'll have to watch it again, i saw mainly m2m. What happened on the play you refer too?

True, when they were in man to man defense. When they were in zone (2-3 matchup), Utoff is supposed to cut off the backside cutter until he is at least to the middle of the lane. That never happened. And Jok was not on the baseline of the zone; Ogs was there when both were on the floor at the same time.

 

[Knight78]

A missed shot and an assist, while Iowa grows lead from down -3 to ahead to ahead.

Plus, 'missing a layup'. You can't even see with unbiased eyes! He drove hard, into traffic, was contacted by 2 guys, his defender (which we went by) a 2nd topside help guy that bumped him, (both couldve been called fouls) only to be confronted, at the rim, by their defensive center (3rd guy) then, in scramble for ball a 4th defender contacts him, then he wrestles it from the center for smart pass for bucket.

Only a completely biased viewer calls that 'missing a layup'.

Defensively, creates TO, rebounds, and plays excellent D on his man, doesn't get beat, or foul or TO.

So your saying he must score, to be good for you?

If you CAN get to the rim and you miss the shot, what else to you call it if you miss the shot? It doesn't matter if you get bumped or not, you missed the shot. It doesn't matter if you get fouled or not, you missed the shot. If you're playing in the lane, pretty much anything less than a severed limb is not a foul - you HAVE to play like that. As another poster stated (maybe not on this thread) "Look at the scars on the shoulders of McCabe and Woody." You get scars like that doing battle down low. If you're going to fall down on contact, you're not going to be a finisher. And until Utoff gets more strength in his upper body, he's not going to be a finisher.

 

[Knight78]

Simple question who Mike do you want coming off the bench?

I know who I want coming off the bench. I want the guys who have proven in practice that they deserve to be there. If they aren't going to perform in practice, they won't perform in a game. And since none of us have attended all the Hawkeye practices....