Joe Wieskamp No. 25 in ESPN's New Top 60 for '18

[Hawk5656]

After some thought, I think you're right. I just looked up all time college hoops wins and Iowa is in the Top 40 and Michigan is not in the Top 100. I had no idea that Iowa was up there that much, but think it has to do with when their program began. Their all time win % is .587 which puts them at the bottom of the Top 50.

I'm just curious: what would it take in your opinion for a team to be termed a "blue blood?"

Maybe this would be the list?
UK--most wins
UCLA--most championships
UNC--most Final Fours
Duke--One of the best coaches for 25 years
Kansas--
Indiana--last undefeated season
Syracuse?

The first 6 you listed are the blue bloods for sure and that's probably it for now. UCONN maybe the 7th if you had to add one but I think it's at 6 for now

 

[PCHawk]

I'm bringing him up to show you High School stats don't really mean anything. Tillo was not a major conference caliber player regardless what he did in High School.

That's like saying Tyler Sash would have definitely sucked at basketball because he chose football. There are players all over 5he country that only had one D1 offer or no D1 offers and turned out to be good. And high school stats do matter. If Bohannon would have put up 15 per game, odds are more in favor of him not being good. If he would have put up 40 per game, odds are even better that he would have been good. I can't believe your saying him scoring 25 per game and being considered the best basketball player in the state makes you feel the exact same way as if he scored 18 per game and wasn't the best in the state.

Because of how good he was his senior year, his odds are better of being a good D1 player than they were if he played the same as he did as a junior. Anyone who disagrees with that is a moron.

 

[PCHawk]

And @AdamHawk can attack anyone on here, claiming that anyone who disagrees with him is a troll, or claiming they don't know what they are talking about. Or in my case, flaming me and saying I haven't read 12 pages of blah blah blah and 10 different points which have continually changed the main point about Boho earlier in the thread.

When I logged in and read this thread today, that was the key point that stuck with me and the reason why I hopped on here and jumped in. The point of this thread that resonated as one of the key messages was that Fran needed another PG better than Boho. And then all of these Boho apologists came on here saying he'll be good to great. That's not the type of player you're getting. You're getting an guard who lacks athletism, size and strength, but who can shoot the heck out of the ball. Hopefully for everyone's sake it's a mixture of Ogs + Ellingson who can shoot. I'd even take a Brody Boyd out of him. But I am expecting very little and will be happy if by his junior year he is a meaningful contributor. That would show everyone how great of a talent developer Fran is and I sure hope he is.

Come on man. How can you call people who are optomistic that an incoming freshman will be pretty good "apologists" of the kid? He's not some guy who is doing something wrong and we are sticking up for him anyway. He's an 18 year old kid who hasn't even done anything to apologize for yet.

 

[Hawk5656]

That's like saying Tyler Sash would have definitely sucked at basketball because he chose football. There are players all over 5he country that only had one D1 offer or no D1 offers and turned out to be good. And high school stats do matter. If Bohannon would have put up 15 per game, odds are more in favor of him not being good. If he would have put up 40 per game, odds are even better that he would have been good. I can't believe your saying him scoring 25 per game and being considered the best basketball player in the state makes you feel the exact same way as if he scored 18 per game and wasn't the best in the state.

Because of how good he was his senior year, his odds are better of being a good D1 player than they were if he played the same as he did as a junior. Anyone who disagrees with that is a moron.

So you think odds are more in favor of Moss or Cook not being good because they averaged so few points in High School? High School stats don't matter because kids are put in different situations and playing different competition. Iowa High School basketball is not good competition. He's not a different player from when he committed and he still has the same limitations

 

[PCHawk]

So you think odds are more in favor of Moss or Cook not being good because they averaged so few points in High School? High School stats don't matter because kids are put in different situations and playing different competition. Iowa High School basketball is not good competition. He's not a different player from when he committed and he still has the same limitations

I'm saying if Cook averaged 3 points a game I wouldn't be too excited right now. If he averaged 17 I would be more excited than I am now. I'm not going to compare what a kid does in Iowa to what a kid does in Chicago or St. Louis. I'm comparing Bohannon as he is now to Bohannon before his senior year. Everyone who knows anything will tell you he's a better player now.

 

[PCHawk]

Also I'm more optomistic when players are still showing improvement in their senior year. Plenty of high ranked recruits are only high ranked because they peaked at 16 and we're way better than other 16 year olds. Those are the ones who turn out to be busts because they quit getting better while everyone around them improves. I know you don't think Bohannon has improved so you can't see that side but from everything I have seen and heard, he is a different player than he was a year ago.

 

[Hawk5656]

Also I'm more optomistic when players are still showing improvement in their senior year. Plenty of high ranked recruits are only high ranked because they peaked at 16 and we're way better than other 16 year olds. Those are the ones who turn out to be busts because they quit getting better while everyone around them improves. I know you don't think Bohannon has improved so you can't see that side but from everything I have seen and heard, he is a different player than he was a year ago.

So you think Tyler Cook will be a bust because his stats didn't really show improvement from his junior to senior year? That's where we disagree

 

[PCHawk]

So you think Tyler Cook will be a bust because his stats didn't really show improvement from his junior to senior year? That's where we disagree

It is more likely he will be a bust than it would be if he did improve his stats. Nothing is for sure.

 

[stomper90]

So you think odds are more in favor of Moss or Cook not being good because they averaged so few points in High School? High School stats don't matter because kids are put in different situations and playing different competition. Iowa High School basketball is not good competition. He's not a different player from when he committed and he still has the same limitations

Correct-a-mundo -- but "Anyone who disagrees with that is a moron."

 

[stomper90]

So you think Tyler Cook will be a bust because his stats didn't really show improvement from his junior to senior year? That's where we disagree

We're fighting a fuitle fight with some of these guys...

Who has ever heard of AAU or travelling teams? I mean that is inconsequential right? High school games without shot clocks and with very dumbed down offenses are all about the stats. I mean the best player *always* dominates.

If anyone wants some education on the subject, I definitely wouldn't listen to a Podcast with a certain AAU coach (who also is a pretty damn good talent evaluator) and hear him explain why you saw a completely different Connor and Patrick at West last year vs. when they are on the AAU circuit. Why their stats in high school basketball don't mean a thing to their development.

 

[stomper90]

That's like saying Tyler Sash would have definitely sucked at basketball because he chose football. There are players all over 5he country that only had one D1 offer or no D1 offers and turned out to be good. And high school stats do matter. If Bohannon would have put up 15 per game, odds are more in favor of him not being good. If he would have put up 40 per game, odds are even better that he would have been good. I can't believe your saying him scoring 25 per game and being considered the best basketball player in the state makes you feel the exact same way as if he scored 18 per game and wasn't the best in the state.

Because of how good he was his senior year, his odds are better of being a good D1 player than they were if he played the same as he did as a junior. Anyone who disagrees with that is a moron.

Allowing you to keep digging a deeper hole by commingling the points.

The main point of this thread (AFTER the great news about JW) + subtracting a bunch of the side tangents like comparing NCAA football to NCAA basketball (because hoops players are also recruited as ATH's too and it's apples to apples right?):

1. Fran missed on getting a lead #1 PG in this class
2. As a fall, fall, fall, fall back option, he offered Jordan and he accepted basically on the spot.
3. There are concerns about Fran's ability to land a stud PG which many believe is a key ingredient to a successful March run.
4. All of the Hawkeye sites / news pubs were identifying how big of a need this was for the Spring signing period
5. Fran has missed on at least 10 "stud" PGs. The reason why I refer to them as studs -- the major talent evaluators have all agreed that these guys project to be great players. Why? Not based on high school basketball stats, but based on a multitutde of things. Size, athletitsm, shot, weight, ability to rim protector, shot blocking ability etc.
6. Now that Jordan is here, he is getting singled out by a lot of people because instead of getting a #1 they got a fall back option who lacks athletism, the ability to guard at the next level (to be debated), size, quickness, etc. A lot of the things that allowed a kid like Jordan to succeed in high school are things that will be exposed at the next level. For instance, not every player of the year in college is going to play in the NBA. Different games, different levels.

Back to what you said here -- do you really, really, really want the best player in Iowa High School Hoops to be on your Iowa Hawkeye B1G, NCAA Basketball team? Just because they are rated the best player in Iowa, does that really make them a B1G calibur athlete? Many on here are hoping to break through and hit that next level of success in college basketball. So I just want to be clear here -- the best player in Iowa always is worthy of a scholly?

Let's take the past 3 Mr. Iowa Baskebtall for example.

Mr. Iowa Basketball players the past 4 years:

2016 -- Jordo Boho - College Hoops: Iowa
2015-- Daniel Tillo -- College Hoops: Nope -- College offer from Iowa? Nope https://n.rivals.com/goldrush/content/prospects/8779
2014: Wyatt Lohaus-- College Hoops: UNI -- College offer from Iowa? Nope. https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/maple/140391
2013: Jok (had all of the physical attributes that the scouts wanted to see, colleges were scared of his injury history and Iowa stood by him and never rescinded their scholly)

 

[deanvogs]

LOL, now we got a guy who joined just a few months ago bashing all over JoBo as well.

When all you do is focus on one recruit and ignore everything else great that has being going on in the Iowa basketball program, you know they are trolling. They say Fran can't recruit, because he got JoBo, yet ignore that Fran brought in kids that will lead to 4 straight NBA draft picks (Uthoff this year, and Pete next). Then they ignore that Fran brought in a top 75 kid this year, a top 100 coming in next year, and then 2 top 50 kids in the next two years.

Yet they will say he can't recruit because he missed on PG this year. LOL, trollio away Stomps and 5656.

 

[Hawk5656]

LOL, now we got a guy who joined just a few months ago bashing all over JoBo as well.

When all you do is focus on one recruit and ignore everything else great that has being going on in the Iowa basketball program, you know they are trolling. They say Fran can't recruit, because he got JoBo, yet ignore that Fran brought in kids that will lead to 4 straight NBA draft picks (Uthoff this year, and Pete next). Then they ignore that Fran brought in a top 75 kid this year, a top 100 coming in next year, and then 2 top 50 kids in the next two years.

Yet they will say he can't recruit because he missed on PG this year. LOL, trollio away Stomps and 5656.

Who said Fran can't recruit? I think it's the weakest part of his coaching arsenal but that's only because he's great at everything else like player development, preparation and running a very effective system.

I guarantee you were disappointed when Bohannon committed and now you seem like it's a great thing so I'm curious on what changed

 

[Hawk5656]

Allowing you to keep digging a deeper hole by commingling the points.

The main point of this thread (AFTER the great news about JW) + subtracting a bunch of the side tangents like comparing NCAA football to NCAA basketball (because hoops players are also recruited as ATH's too and it's apples to apples right?):

1. Fran missed on getting a lead #1 PG in this class
2. As a fall, fall, fall, fall back option, he offered Jordan and he accepted basically on the spot.
3. There are concerns about Fran's ability to land a stud PG which many believe is a key ingredient to a successful March run.
4. All of the Hawkeye sites / news pubs were identifying how big of a need this was for the Spring signing period
5. Fran has missed on at least 10 "stud" PGs. The reason why I refer to them as studs -- the major talent evaluators have all agreed that these guys project to be great players. Why? Not based on high school basketball stats, but based on a multitutde of things. Size, athletitsm, shot, weight, ability to rim protector, shot blocking ability etc.
6. Now that Jordan is here, he is getting singled out by a lot of people because instead of getting a #1 they got a fall back option who lacks athletism, the ability to guard at the next level (to be debated), size, quickness, etc. A lot of the things that allowed a kid like Jordan to succeed in high school are things that will be exposed at the next level. For instance, not every player of the year in college is going to play in the NBA. Different games, different levels.

Back to what you said here -- do you really, really, really want the best player in Iowa High School Hoops to be on your Iowa Hawkeye B1G, NCAA Basketball team? Just because they are rated the best player in Iowa, does that really make them a B1G calibur athlete? Many on here are hoping to break through and hit that next level of success in college basketball. So I just want to be clear here -- the best player in Iowa always is worthy of a scholly?

Let's take the past 3 Mr. Iowa Baskebtall for example.

Mr. Iowa Basketball players the past 4 years:

2016 -- Jordo Boho - College Hoops: Iowa
2015-- Daniel Tillo -- College Hoops: Nope -- College offer from Iowa? Nope https://n.rivals.com/goldrush/content/prospects/8779
2014: Wyatt Lohaus-- College Hoops: UNI -- College offer from Iowa? Nope. https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/maple/140391
2013: Jok (had all of the physical attributes that the scouts wanted to see, colleges were scared of his injury history and Iowa stood by him and never rescinded their scholly)

Pemsl is the highest rated recruit in the state anyways

http://247sports.com/Player/Cordell-Pemsl-30977

 

[PCHawk]

We're fighting a fuitle fight with some of these guys...

Who has ever heard of AAU or travelling teams? I mean that is inconsequential right? High school games without shot clocks and with very dumbed down offenses are all about the stats. I mean the best player *always* dominates.

If anyone wants some education on the subject, I definitely wouldn't listen to a Podcast with a certain AAU coach (who also is a pretty damn good talent evaluator) and hear him explain why you saw a completely different Connor and Patrick at West last year vs. when they are on the AAU circuit. Why their stats in high school basketball don't mean a thing to their development.

Some people's arguing ability cracks me up. I mention I'm more excited about Bohannon now because he has become a better scorer and was recognized as the best player in the state. So now all you have is to say I'm saying stats are the ONLY thing that matters.

 

[PCHawk]

Pemsl is the highest rated recruit in the state anyways

http://247sports.com/Player/Cordell-Pemsl-30977

And doesn't that say something about Bohannon? This isn't a year where there are no good players. There is a nationally recognized players this year and JB still is considered the best. That seemed highly unlikely when he signed. You keep saying nothing changed but it takes a lot to change perception. Perception was Pemsl was the best player and JB's play this year changed that perception.

 

[PCHawk]

Allowing you to keep digging a deeper hole by commingling the points.

The main point of this thread (AFTER the great news about JW) + subtracting a bunch of the side tangents like comparing NCAA football to NCAA basketball (because hoops players are also recruited as ATH's too and it's apples to apples right?):

1. Fran missed on getting a lead #1 PG in this class
2. As a fall, fall, fall, fall back option, he offered Jordan and he accepted basically on the spot.
3. There are concerns about Fran's ability to land a stud PG which many believe is a key ingredient to a successful March run.
4. All of the Hawkeye sites / news pubs were identifying how big of a need this was for the Spring signing period
5. Fran has missed on at least 10 "stud" PGs. The reason why I refer to them as studs -- the major talent evaluators have all agreed that these guys project to be great players. Why? Not based on high school basketball stats, but based on a multitutde of things. Size, athletitsm, shot, weight, ability to rim protector, shot blocking ability etc.
6. Now that Jordan is here, he is getting singled out by a lot of people because instead of getting a #1 they got a fall back option who lacks athletism, the ability to guard at the next level (to be debated), size, quickness, etc. A lot of the things that allowed a kid like Jordan to succeed in high school are things that will be exposed at the next level. For instance, not every player of the year in college is going to play in the NBA. Different games, different levels.

Back to what you said here -- do you really, really, really want the best player in Iowa High School Hoops to be on your Iowa Hawkeye B1G, NCAA Basketball team? Just because they are rated the best player in Iowa, does that really make them a B1G calibur athlete? Many on here are hoping to break through and hit that next level of success in college basketball. So I just want to be clear here -- the best player in Iowa always is worthy of a scholly?

Let's take the past 3 Mr. Iowa Baskebtall for example.

Mr. Iowa Basketball players the past 4 years:

2016 -- Jordo Boho - College Hoops: Iowa
2015-- Daniel Tillo -- College Hoops: Nope -- College offer from Iowa? Nope https://n.rivals.com/goldrush/content/prospects/8779
2014: Wyatt Lohaus-- College Hoops: UNI -- College offer from Iowa? Nope. https://n.rivals.com/content/prospects/maple/140391
2013: Jok (had all of the physical attributes that the scouts wanted to see, colleges were scared of his injury history and Iowa stood by him and never rescinded their scholly)

I would absolutely take Mr Basketball every year and take my chances. Not all are going to pan out but not all recruits pan out regardless of where they came from. I'll gladly take the few misses if it means getting the guys like Barnes and Paige.

And this is a long thread so I don't remember, who was comparing football to basketball?

 

[Hawk5656]

And doesn't that say something about Bohannon? This isn't a year where there are no good players. There is a nationally recognized players this year and JB still is considered the best. That seemed highly unlikely when he signed. You keep saying nothing changed but it takes a lot to change perception. Perception was Pemsl was the best player and JB's play this year changed that perception.

Who is nationally recognized? Perception is that Pemsl will be the better college player, who won Mr. Basketball is irrelevant just like High School stats are. If I had my choice of 4 years of Pemsl or 4 years of Bohannon I'm taking Pemsl

 

[AdamHawk]

Correct--they have definitely made vast improvements -- nobody can disagree with that. But I disagree that the expectation should be that it "won't be for some time" -- yes, it's easier to recruit at a perennial winner or schools in warm weather (FL, USC, UCLA etc.) however, Iowa is a top 20 school in hoops attendance, have poured money into the facilities, have consistency at the coaching position, and have a pipeline of really good kids coming in-- Cook, Fran's kids, JW, and maybe even some of their friends.

Compare it to what Gregg Marshall has done with the Shockers. He is bringing in a couple of Top 100 kids to Wichita State every year or every other year and is competing at high levels. He's been in Wichita for 9 years vs. 6 for Fran in Iowa. In 3 years, would it be safe to say if Iowa is not consistently battling for high recruits and winning 1-2 a year while making consistent appearances in Sweet 16s that you can say this staff might want to rethink their approach / coaching staff to get stronger at recruiting?

I'm stoked he's locking down the state and Prohm isn't getting the kids that Iowa wants. But to hit that next level of elite, he's going to have to start winning some border wars and bringing in some recruits out of market. You've seen football have to do that. In the early 2000s they were bringing in kids from FLA and now they have started to go after Texas. At some point you have to bring in other kids who want to be apart of what you're building. Maybe St. Louis / Chicago could be that secondary market for the basketball program. Trying to fight for relevance out east is going to be continually difficult.

It's the constant battle of striving for excellence and I am hopeful that this staff can get there. But you've seen a lot of coaching staffs do it in the same amount of time in lesser markets and I think a portion of the fan base would like to see that happen here rather than "just hoping to make it to the tourny."

IMO The sweet spot for targets are kids ranked somewhere between 50 and 150 because those are the kids most likely not to be 1 and done and will stick around for 3 years. Iowa will never be in a position where they can bring in blue chip kid after blue chip kid and then restock after they turn pro early. It's just not that type of program.

So you think that Iowa should be regularly beating Kansas, Nova and MSU regularly on the recruiting trail? There are several schools out there with a lot more sustained success than Iowa out there who can't even do that. Also, that's a far cry from what Marshall is doing at Wichita State. He has brought in exactly 1 top 150 recruit in the last 5 years. I'm not sure where you get your info, unless you are counting top 150 JUCO kids as being top 150 in the nation (that's not how it works). He has never had a recruit ranked as high as OUT OF STATE commit Tyler Cook.

Beyond that, quite a bit of Fran's talent has come from other states in case you haven't noticed. White is from Ohio, Marble is from Michigan, Basabe is from NY, etc. Also, discounting kids because they are from the state of Iowa is disingenuous. Very good players come from this state. As a matter of fact, there is one starting an NBA finals game tonight. Fran has done a phenomenal job in keeping local talent right here ever since he's arrived in Iowa City.

 

[AdamHawk]

So you think odds are more in favor of Moss or Cook not being good because they averaged so few points in High School? High School stats don't matter because kids are put in different situations and playing different competition. Iowa High School basketball is not good competition. He's not a different player from when he committed and he still has the same limitations

FYI Jordan Bohannon averaged more PPG his senior year than Matt Gatens. Same competition.