Miss Woodbury at the moment.

Hawk5656 said:
Why do you have to swap out Woodbury for Cook? Why can't you look at it as swapping Woodbury for Uhl which would be a major upgrade
Click to expand...

Well, yes, but that's not the implication of the argument of starting post vs starting post. I'll play along ...
If you wanna start qualifying the who, what, when and how much, then fine, I'll take Woody for Uhl - who wouldn't want a 7' over 6'9". However, he should be out there for nothing more than his contribution on D, which is worth about 10-12 minutes a game as a reliable back-up.

Even then, I still see it as a toss-up between him and Uhl because of what Uhl can bring on both ends. I'd be willing to concede a little on defense in exchange for Uhl consistently giving me 8 & 10 -- which out performs Woody's averages. Not to mention, the added dynamic of being able to shoot from 3, which, at least commands respect from the opposing D so they have to play more honestly on Jok.
 
STILLBUSTER said:
Well, yes, but that's not the implication of the argument of starting post vs starting post. I'll play along ...
If you wanna start qualifying the who, what, when and how much, then fine, I'll take Woody for Uhl - who wouldn't want a 7' over 6'9". However, he should be out there for nothing more than his contribution on D, which is worth about 10-12 minutes a game as a reliable back-up.

Even then, I still see it as a toss-up between him and Uhl because of what Uhl can bring on both ends. I'd be willing to concede a little on defense in exchange for Uhl consistently giving me 8 & 10 -- which out performs Woody's averages. Not to mention, the added dynamic of being able to shoot from 3, which, at least commands respect from the opposing D so they have to play more honestly on Jok.
Click to expand...

Woody is much better than Uhl and it's not even close.
 
Based on how easy they got past guards and the way it was being called. I doubt woody would have played a ton of minutes due to foul trouble. I think have Mike there would have helped a lot for less turnovers, my cohesive offense. That would have maybe made the difference in win column. Bohanons turnovers lead to easy points, if you say we score a third of those possessions and don't turn it over that's a 10 pt swing right there.
 
smhawk said:
Based on how easy they got past guards and the way it was being called. I doubt woody would have played a ton of minutes due to foul trouble. I think have Mike there would have helped a lot for less turnovers, my cohesive offense. That would have maybe made the difference in win column. Bohanons turnovers lead to easy points, if you say we score a third of those possessions and don't turn it over that's a 10 pt swing right there.
Click to expand...

Mike and Sapp were really good perimeter defenders. Mike would have done more than just help out with turnovers
 
Bigtenchamp said:
Whipping boy for many... but we are missing his defensive presence and rebounding.

This team has potential for sure.. but we need to find some better interior defense.
Click to expand...

A lot of the "missing interior defense" is because the guards played matador defense.
 
The perimeter defense was bad yes... and I'm not saying Woodbury was great by any means.

I just going to go ahead and be an asshole and say that some of you have some limited perceptions here..

Woodbury wasn't much on offense but he was a very important defensive player. The limitations of our team the last few years was our inability for our perimeter players to shoot and score...

People focus so much on Woodbury's scoring... it had little impact on anything. Cook could make as many spinning dunks as he wants... but if no one plays defense it won't matter - Unless you are 13..

We need some players to play these types of defensive roles on this team or else its going to be a long season.
 
Not missing a Woody at all. Watching a 7 footer get blocked from the underside of the rim was painful. This team is exciting and will win more than they lose but even those losses are going to be entertaining.
 
hawkeye12345 said:
Not missing a Woody at all. Watching a 7 footer get blocked from the underside of the rim was painful. This team is exciting and will win more than they lose but even those losses are going to be entertaining.
Click to expand...

Defense wins championships. I'd rather watch Big Ten football where defense is a priority than Texas Tech or Oklahoma State lose 75-72
 
I dont miss Woody. Defense can improve.
Remember, this team is young and inexperienced.
Also, they played the Big East Champs that started 4 jrs and a Sr. That will make a huge difference.

By the end of the season, I bet our defense is pretty good.
 
As bad as the d was it was the turnovers that lost Iowa the game. That stretch halfway through the second half where we seemed to turn the ball over 4-5 times in a row for easy layups.
 
Bigtenchamp said:
The perimeter defense was bad yes... and I'm not saying Woodbury was great by any means.

I just going to go ahead and be an asshole and say that some of you have some limited perceptions here..

Woodbury wasn't much on offense but he was a very important defensive player. The limitations of our team the last few years was our inability for our perimeter players to shoot and score...

People focus so much on Woodbury's scoring... it had little impact on anything. Cook could make as many spinning dunks as he wants... but if no one plays defense it won't matter - Unless you are 13..

We need some players to play these types of defensive roles on this team or else its going to be a long season.
Click to expand...

That's not true. If Cook had 5 more spinning dunks, we win.
 
Motigerhawk said:
I dont miss Woody. Defense can improve.
Remember, this team is young and inexperienced.
Also, they played the Big East Champs that started 4 jrs and a Sr. That will make a huge difference.

By the end of the season, I bet our defense is pretty good.
Click to expand...

They weren't Big East champs last year
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top