Gander Hawk
Well-Known Member
Rebraca needed to lose minutes, he's too valuable to be playing 40 minutes a game.
Sandfort Huge Miss.... Now?
- Thread starter HawkGold
- Start date
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
In part because they decided to play 5 guards, which turned out to be an excellent move.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
Maybe. We know they played 5 guards and CM played the entire game. We know Iowa won. We don't know the alternative outcome. Shooters are about fundamentals and mental aspects. Some shooters shoot better when tired. We also don't know why others' minutes were cut. Pretty sure 40 minutes for any player is tough.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
He got 24. Sandfort 19
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
Res ispsa loquitur.
I'm going with the result, and what the announcers and Coach were saying about playing five guards in this particular game. It was effective.
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
I'll take more turds like this. When does the "recency bias" fade? Please enlighten us proles.
Fryowa
Administrator
My comments at the time stand. You trying to depict yourself as a genius doesn't hold water, you didn't know he'd play better any more than anyone thinking he was a recruiting miss. He's still had more below average games than not, and you also missed where I said I hoped I was wrong.
The internet is good for two things...hot takes and triggering. I accomplished both.
I think you probably missed where I said I hoped I was wrong, so you're actually trying to shame me for something I said I hoped would happen. You gotta start taking notes.
ForeverHawk
Well-Known Member
So were you wrong?
Fryowa
Administrator
Yet to be determined. See me at the end of the year.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
Haven't seen res ipsa loquitur since law school. Bravo, sir.
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
I think we have seen enough to conclude he was not a recruiting miss. He showed really good flashes as a true frosh last year, albeit in limited action. But, I think we all thought he looked the part and would contend for minutes/starting this year. He did. He sucked. But, it seems obvious enough it was a mental thing. Hell, the kid was missing two foot put backs. He was Chuck Knoblauching his way up and down the court. The kid has clearly exercised his demons and damn, he was nothing short of an assassin last night off the bench. The trendline is strong and I think he will at least be a solid bench contributor the rest of the year, and likely be the hero here and there as we head down the stretch.
He may never be a superstar, but he has shown enough body of work to conclude he was not a recruiting miss.
Nothing wrong with a hot take that was wrong in Iowa's favor!!
The Sandfort we've seen lately is the one I thought we would see this year. I thought be might make 100 3s this year. With hos length and quick release I figured he would at least have a Bohannon type year from 3. His shooting troubles cost him a lot of makes early, and that cost him minutes until recently. But he still has it in him to get to 100 in one of the next two seasons. Eapecially with the roster we have on paper next year. He's gunna have to launch yen 3s per game.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
Sandfort is a shooter which is different than a pure shooter. A shooter can go 0-6 and then hit 7 in a row. It gets in his head that he doesn't have that freedom I would guess. He gets warm when he's been out there for awhile.
Iowa at their best is when he heats up and is allowed to do so in baskets and time on the court. He scores in bunches late.
He also needs good picks. Doesn't always happen and depends on matchups. He is also a rebounding machine at times.
Northside Hawk
Well-Known Member
Still hoping he has turned the corner in the growth/adjustment stage that probably 95% of division 1 athletes deal with at some stage.
Like virtually every D-1 kid, Sandfort was the alpha dog at his high school. He had to first accept a reserve role last year, for the first time in his life, then come out this year with opponents of equal or greater talent marking him on their advance scouting reports. Also probably for the first time in his life.
If his good games start to outnumber his bad games, as they seem to have done in January, that is a good sign that he is turning that corner. I was harsh on him in November and December, posted that while he had proven toughness late last year, he now had to do it with no JBo commanding attention.
I love how he comes off screens and pops, just like Dale Ellis. And I predict that over the next two years he will lead the conference in four point play attempts. When was the last time we had a 6'7 dude who could do that. Kingsbury, Recker, Moss and Gatens were in the 6'5 range. I dont think Wieskamp used screens the way Sandfort does.
Wait til he gets more and more familiar with the offense and learns to read screens better.
Like virtually every D-1 kid, Sandfort was the alpha dog at his high school. He had to first accept a reserve role last year, for the first time in his life, then come out this year with opponents of equal or greater talent marking him on their advance scouting reports. Also probably for the first time in his life.
If his good games start to outnumber his bad games, as they seem to have done in January, that is a good sign that he is turning that corner. I was harsh on him in November and December, posted that while he had proven toughness late last year, he now had to do it with no JBo commanding attention.
I love how he comes off screens and pops, just like Dale Ellis. And I predict that over the next two years he will lead the conference in four point play attempts. When was the last time we had a 6'7 dude who could do that. Kingsbury, Recker, Moss and Gatens were in the 6'5 range. I dont think Wieskamp used screens the way Sandfort does.
Wait til he gets more and more familiar with the offense and learns to read screens better.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
You kidding me? His D is pretty darn good. Watch his D away from the ball. Also look at rebounds per minute played.
FT = 90.5
NW- 5 rebounds, 5 assts.
Rutgers - 7 Reb
MD - 7 Reb 3 asst
Mich 7 Reb 3 Asst
Rut 5 Reb
4th on team in reb per game
6th in Min played
5th in scoring
3rd Pts per minute played
3rd Reb per minute played but close to first
TO s he is 7th and about normal but way behind Flip, Perkins, Ulis and Bowen in TO's per game.
Trails Perkins and Ulis in assts per minutes played by a tad. Really close to Conner and Flip. 5th in overall assts. 6th in minutes played. 4rd in steals and 3rd in steals per minute played.
racerhawk
Well-Known Member
What kind of an admin says "high school film queen" and "doesn't have the stones" about a young player for the hawks?
trj
Well-Known Member
Nope. Every game you pointed out were games where he was making shots. JBo had pretty good assist numbers and they were all directly related to him making shots.
HawkGold
Well-Known Member
I was looking at his other stats. His high point games come late when he's worked into the game. Can't think of when he had a good game...late and the Hawks lost even if he struggled early. Mostly when he struggles early he doesn't get much time and he doesn't look like a superstar late.
He also had a lot of rebounds against I think Rutgers and not many points.
Last edited:
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
Comparing Sanford to JBO is a miss. They are both great 3 point shooters. JBO is probably a better and more clutch shooter, but both can make big shots from behind the arc. JBO was an otherwise minus point guard (except for FTs of course).
Sanford is a good defender. Not great, but good. Like Patrick, he is deceptively long. He is also a good rebounder, very good passer and a great FT shooter. Sanford has value on the court even when he is not on, but when he is on, he needs to be on the court.
Sanford is a good defender. Not great, but good. Like Patrick, he is deceptively long. He is also a good rebounder, very good passer and a great FT shooter. Sanford has value on the court even when he is not on, but when he is on, he needs to be on the court.
