The problem with this roster

[smoot27]

First of all, we need to be patient and give Fran a chance to bring in his own recruits. We are still working with a lot of the old regime's players. I'm excited about Woodbury and Gessell as I believe they will be more talented all around players. Ingram could add some ability to create shots we currently lack.

Our basic problem is that our roster is full of one dimensional players without a real well-rounded player who can be relied on offensively.

Cartwright - very limited mid-range game and virtually no perimeter shot

Basabe - No perimeter shot and limited shot from mid-range, relies on athletic moves in the paint

Gatens - Only a spot shooter. Limited ability to create his own shot

Those are by far our three best players and they really should be situational role players on a good team.

I could see White and Oglesby continuing to develop into decent players. Oglesby will probably be fairly one dimensional, but shooting is a good dimension to have for a team that seems to lack that.

McCabe is what he is. He can shoot effectively and hustles. You just can't run an offense through him. Ideally, you'd like him to be a hustle guy off the bench.

Marble should ideally also be an up-tempo guy off the bench in spot minutes as he can't shoot effectively. This would maximize his talent which is athleticism and make him a bigger threat defensively.

There is no sugarcoating this year's team. They are simply bad and hard to watch. I still believe with the system and the recruits coming in, that we will improve a lot over the next 2-3 seasons.

 

[tm3308]

We're working with 4 players from Lick's teams. That's not "a lot".

Other than that, I agree with you.

 

[smoot27]

We're working with 4 players from Lick's teams. That's not "a lot".

Other than that, I agree with you.

I have: Brommer, May, Marble, McCabe, Archie and Gatens

I realize that Marble and McCabe were officially Fran's first class, but he was trying to keep our class intact and didn't have much time to recruit his own.

 

[hawkIhoops]

Good post. I have been pleasantly surprised with Oglesby. He has better handles than I anticipated and has a fairly dynamic offensive game for a freshman. I would also like to see White be more aggressive off the bounce.

 

[DaBears]

...we have too many white guys.

Our bench looks like a WDM Valley High School team.

 

[LakeHavasu]

You can say Gatens was a Lick recruit & be correct, but every coach the Hawkeye's have had would have recruited and signed him. While he may not be the complete answer, he is not the major problem either, IMHO.

 

[herbyhawk]

Marble is 7 games into his 2nd year
and you are ready to throw in the Garabage heap of 'CAN'T" improve
he will end up a starter and on most team he would and can be a starter or 6th man
May can shoot and drive and finish at the rim
his problem is confidence, he misses his 1st couple of shots and goes into the tank
6th man is his role
McCabe is a 6th man on alot of good teams and will continue to get better
problem is he is caught between positions
shoots like a three but plays like a 4, my wish is that he could be quicker to be a solid 3
Basabe same problem with McCabe only the opposite
plays the 4 and has very limited range wish here is he could grow 2's
White is going to be a good one but he is 7 games into his career
a combination of McCabe and Basabe
he can play outside and inside, and he is quicker than people give him credit for
Olaseni i was quite high on him
he could have used a redshirt as he will defenitely get better
he has the hops and quiks plus he is 6'11
he is struggling with the physical play
Oglesby is a good shooter but is just 7 games into his freshmen year on most teams he would be getting spot minutes his starting would be based on his defense and ability to penetrate to the rimm
Brommer and Archie are what they are and probably get no more minutes than a 11th or 12th man on the bench would
Cartwright and Gatens could and probably would start for most teams

some will disagree because their mind are made up based on just a few games of the sophamores and freshmans because of not producing like they want them to or expect them to
these kids are not top 50 recruits, but they are better than some think and will only get better
some will not, but that is a risk you take with any recruit
h@ll even Woodbury and Gesell could come in and be flops
there are no guarentees in a players success or failure

 

[CAARHawk]

Sorry, but Gatens is a problem. As the OP said, he is mostly just a spot up shooter and his average is just not nearly as high as it needs to be for that role. Apart from that, he is a major liability on defense. He just is not close to quick enough to rotate on shooters. How many times have we seen him rotate late leaving a guy wide open for a three? He does that last second lunge at the guy, but by the time he gets there the ball is already gone.

Why do you all think teams shoot so well from three against Iowa? It is because Iowa has some of the slowest guards around.

Matt really should have been a three on a division II squad. In fact, Brommer, May, Archie, Cougs, Tucker, and Little Lick should also have been playing on that level. They are college players, just not at this level.

 

[Brasky]

Matt really should have been a three on a division II squad.

This is monumentally stupid. Time to erase CAAR of the list of rational thinkers.

 

[ChosenChildren]

Actually, I think he is correct - maybe you should go off the list

 

[smoot27]

This is monumentally stupid. Time to erase CAAR of the list of rational thinkers.

I think Gatens can be starter material at this level. I could see him being a type of player like Kent McCausland was if he had talent around him and wasn't relied on as the #1 or 2 option on offense. McCausland had players like Settles, Oliver, Rucker, Koch, Jaacks and others who could collapse the defense and leave him open for three. We don't have the depth of those late 90's teams. Matt needs to be a role player (spot shooter) rather than a key ball handler.

 

[TChawk]

Sorry, but Gatens is a problem. As the OP said, he is mostly just a spot up shooter and his average is just not nearly as high as it needs to be for that role. Apart from that, he is a major liability on defense. He just is not close to quick enough to rotate on shooters. How many times have we seen him rotate late leaving a guy wide open for a three? He does that last second lunge at the guy, but by the time he gets there the ball is already gone.

Why do you all think teams shoot so well from three against Iowa? It is because Iowa has some of the slowest guards around.

Matt really should have been a three on a division II squad. In fact, Brommer, May, Archie, Cougs, Tucker, and Little Lick should also have been playing on that level. They are college players, just not at this level.

What a stupid post...goes to show how little this guy knows about the game of basketball...WOW

 

[Cyclones17]

Iowa fans who think Matt Gatens is a DII player are out of their minds. He is a solid Big 10 player with a bunch of mid major talent surrounding him. A lot of Hawk players from the past, that you think are good, would have looked average with this supporting cast

 

[ICHAWK]

Iowa fans who think Matt Gatens is a DII player are out of their minds. He is a solid Big 10 player with a bunch of mid major talent surrounding him. A lot of Hawk players from the past, that you think are good, would have looked average with this supporting cast

Agree 100%

 

[smoot27]

Iowa fans who think Matt Gatens is a DII player are out of their minds. He is a solid Big 10 player with a bunch of mid major talent surrounding him. A lot of Hawk players from the past, that you think are good, would have looked average with this supporting cast

I agree on this, but disagree with the poster who overrates Marble. He might still improve, but I never see him as an impact player. I think he's a mid-major talent who could play some spot minutes off the bench for us if we improve as a team.

 

[clicheusername3]

We're Back!!!!