Top 10 for the first time since 2002 - wow

[hawkeye12345]

It was spelled "Erek" and I'd take him over either Gabe or Woodbury this year. Hansen was a shot blocking machine. He wasn't needed as a scorer bince we had Haluska, Horner and Brunner. Henderson was not very good, but don't dis Hansen, dude. If that 2005-06 team had the same depth and coaching staff this team has, we would have won the Big Ten for sure, but other than Doug Thomas, there wasn't a lot on the bench. Sondergorney came into his own, but he took some time to develop.

FIFY

 

[528646]

The highest ranking for the '05-'06 team was 12 on Dec 6th, 2005...I suppose for an attorney you could make a case that it was close

It was a good roster but I don't know if you could make an argument that it was better:

PG Horner v Gesell -
SG Haluska v Marble
SF Brunner v White
PF Thomas v Basabe
C Hansen v Woody

Bench
Henderson v Uthoff
Freeman v Clemmons
Thompson v McCabe
Gorney v Olaseni
Reed v Oglewinkel
Wieck v Jok

Give me this years team. '05-06 was good, but we look like a more complete (deeper) team this year.

 

[okeefe4prez]

FIFY

Look, guy, I don't want to get into another argument about Alford. The guy is gone. But face it, he landed some better talent than Fran did. If Fran adequately replaces Marble next season, I will readily concede that Fran is better, but I will need to see what he does when he loses the best guy Lick got to commit (who Fran was able to keep).

 

[okeefe4prez]

Give me this years team. '05-06 was good, but we look like a more complete (deeper) team this year.

This whole chain started as a discussion about the starting 5 - you will find no one who will say the '05-'06 team as a whole is better than this year's team.

 

[HawkIPA]

The highest ranking for the '05-'06 team was 12 on Dec 6th, 2005...I suppose for an attorney you could make a case that it was close

It was a good roster but I don't know if you could make an argument that it was better:

PG Horner v Gesell -
SG Haluska v Marble
SF Brunner v White
PF Thomas v Basabe
C Hansen v Woody

Bench
Henderson v Uthoff
Freeman v Clemmons
Thompson v McCabe
Gorney v Olaseni
Reed v Oglewinkel
Wieck v Jok

First thing, Henderson was a starter and Thomas came off the bench. He actually won B1G Sixth Man of the Year that season.

Second, if you cant see that Oglesby brings much more to the team than Bawinkle ever did you are a complete fool. Its not even a clever nickname.

 

[wundergrape]

It's probably closer than you think. Brunner doubles Basabe's scoring and adds 3 rebounds per game and suprising to me that Mike Henderson outscores Mike Gesell.... I think that changes by year end though. Mike G has stepped up his scoring as of late and Mike G doubles Henderson's assists.

Anyways, below are the stats and links for points, rebounds and assists.

Henderson 7.6, 3.9, 2
Horner 13.6, 4.1, 5.6
Haluska 13.9, 4.7, 2.3
Brunner 14.1, 9.2, 1.8
Hansen 6.7, 4.0, .3


Gesell 7.1, 2.2, 3.8
Marble 16.3, 3.6, 3.3
White 14, 6.4, 2.2
Basabe 7.7, 6.8, .2
Woody 5.4, 4, 1

2005-06 Iowa Hawkeyes Roster and Stats | College Basketball at Sports-Reference.com
Iowa Hawkeyes 2013-14 Statistics - Team and Player Stats - Men's College Basketball - ESPN

These numbers are a tad misleading unless you adjust minutes per game. Basabe, for example plays 18.6 mpg. Brunner played 32. Mike Henderson played 29.8 mpg. Gesell plays 21.8.

...and on down the list.

 

[wundergrape]

Yes, Haluska, and that is totally deceiving. Jr to Sr year doesn't typically account for a huge statistical climb or any major progression, but it turned out we were giving a dominant scorer the same amount of touches as Brunner and Horner. We had 20 PPG at the wing and we opted for high-low junk that minimized our team. That's why Alford was as bad as he was. I love Brunner more than anybody, Horner even more. But Haluska was a pure scorer, and he didn't go from 14 PPG potential to 20 overnight. He was always capable of that.

You can put about 5 of our guys on that '06-'07 team and they would average within shouting distance of 20.

Haluska was a nice player, but his 20 ppg season was inflated in a similar way that Gatens 15 ppg season was.

 

[wundergrape]

It was spelled "Erek" and I'd take him over either Gabe or Woodbury this year. Hansen was a shot blocking machine. He wasn't needed as a scorer bince we had Haluska, Horner and Brunner. Henderson was not very good, but don't dis Hansen, dude. If that 2005-06 team had the same depth this team has, we would have won the Big Ten for sure, but other than Doug Thomas, there wasn't a lot on the bench. Sondergorney came into his own, but he took some time to develop.

This is awesome! You're completely delusional! Yay!

 

[okeefe4prez]

This is awesome! You're completely delusional! Yay!

Why don't you highlight the rest? THIS YEAR. Both guys have upside, but I've only seen one guy with an ability to alter several shots a game the way Hansen did and that was Acie Earl. Hansen was a bit of a liability at times on offense (as our current two guys can be as well), but the guy singlehandedly kept about a dozen points off the scoreboard every night and was a key reason that team got a 3 seed. Gabe's had flashes of that here and there against bad competition, but Hansen did it against the good teams in the conference.

 

[wundergrape]

Why don't you highlight the rest? THIS YEAR. Both guys have upside, but I've only seen one guy with an ability to alter several shots a game the way Hansen did and that was Acie Earl. Hansen was a bit of a liability at times on offense (as our current two guys can be as well), but the guy singlehandedly kept about a dozen points off the scoreboard every night and was a key reason that team got a 3 seed. Gabe's had flashes of that here and there against bad competition, but Hansen did it against the good teams in the conference.

Of course I was talking about this year. Hansen might have blocked one more shot per game than Gabe does, but that doesn't mean that he's the team defender and passer that Woodbury is. That doesn't mean that he's the athlete that Gabe is. That doesn't mean that he's the rebounder that either of them are.

Give me Gabe or Woodbury TODAY over Hansen in '05-'06. NO question.

 

[libradawg]

To be fair, the starting 5 on that squad played more minutes than the current starting 5 plays. The current team is better in the aggregate, but I would take that 05-06 starting 5 over our current one just because we had a huge senior presence on it (plus IIRC Haluska was a redshirt junior so he was the equivalent of a senior).

Given the Seniors we do have: Our unquestioned leader, our bench fixture and probably the most toolsy athlete on the team playing PF. That is 3 being given the reigns seniors should be allotted, to 4 getting all the minutes on that team. Not a huge difference, especially considering how much control Alford wanted for himself. I never heard anybody say this outright, but Alford never said "Jeff, you're our PG. Go finish this for us, you and Bru." Why do I know that conversation (or something a lot like it) never took place? No sustained winning streaks, losses that are absolutely unforgivable that cost us the outright Conference Title, and then a Tourney game that saw us blow two large leads thanks to High School-style press forcing a boatload of turnovers.

Seniors are supposed to give you advantages. Projectibility/predictability, consistency, not a turnover-filled loss to a 14 seed. The 3 we have now are taking this team in a direction those guys don't seem they were allowed to.

 

[ibahawkeye]

To be fair, the starting 5 on that squad played more minutes than the current starting 5 plays. The current team is better in the aggregate, but I would take that 05-06 starting 5 over our current one just because we had a huge senior presence on it (plus IIRC Haluska was a redshirt junior so he was the equivalent of a senior).

This team is also averaging 87 points per game. So I see it as almost a wash because the uptempo creates more scoring/reboudning/assist opportunties.

 

[wundergrape]

This team is also averaging 87 points per game. So I see it as almost a wash because the uptempo creates more scoring/reboudning/assist opportunties.

Then, given that '05-'06 had so many fewer possessions, you should list the turnover stats for each starting five.

Hint: you're not going to like what you see, even if you fail to adjust for the possessions. Horner, Haluska and Henderson were...careless.

 

[libradawg]

Why don't you highlight the rest? THIS YEAR. Both guys have upside, but I've only seen one guy with an ability to alter several shots a game the way Hansen did and that was Acie Earl. Hansen was a bit of a liability at times on offense (as our current two guys can be as well), but the guy singlehandedly kept about a dozen points off the scoreboard every night and was a key reason that team got a 3 seed. Gabe's had flashes of that here and there against bad competition, but Hansen did it against the good teams in the conference.

Dude can call me all the names he wants. I'll state *firmly* that I would take Hansen over our current twosome and then take them back when Woody's a Junior and a viable option for Fran. We'd lose a few lob plays that Olaseni finishes, and they would probably be deferred to Aaron White. The big problems begin when people think gazing at Blocks and Steals will tell the story of their defensive prowess. You know how the guy with all the INTs on your team likely isn't the most effective DB? Or why a baseball player's Errors are about the worst stat to judge them by (unless there's something abnormal). Defense is subjected to the eye test, which I'm positive what's his face did not do. It's impossible to have watched that team and then reduce Hansen's defensive prowess to "meh, a block a game".

On that note, this portion of the conversation is over. Gotta watch to compare.

 

[okeefe4prez]

Dude can call me all the names he wants. I'll state *firmly* that I would take Hansen over our current twosome and then take them back when Woody's a Junior and a viable option for Fran. We'd lose a few lob plays that Olaseni finishes, and they would probably be deferred to Aaron White. The big problems begin when people think gazing at Blocks and Steals will tell the story of their defensive prowess. You know how the guy with all the INTs on your team likely isn't the most effective DB? Or why a baseball player's Errors are about the worst stat to judge them by (unless there's something abnormal). Defense is subjected to the eye test, which I'm positive what's his face did not do. It's impossible to have watched that team and then reduce Hansen's defensive prowess to "meh, a block a game".

On that note, this portion of the conversation is over. Gotta watch to compare.

Spot on. It was far more than a block a game contribution. The shooter would drive the lane and think twice. Or he'd get up and end up throwing a jump pass or drastically changing the angle of his shot. Hansen was just in a completely different league defensively than the guys we have now and people have to be blind or willfully ignorant to think otherwise.

 

[Xerxes]

Nope. We were ranked #10 on January 20, 1998. Same poll date as this one.

Also, Mr. Davis left Iowa with the #21 ranked team in the nation in March, 1999. That 1999 team peaked at #12 on January 9th.

No wonder we didn't renew his contract.

Wow, I don't remember Iowa getting that high but it doesn't surprise me. They were something like 14-2 or 15-2 overall probably around that time. I believe that was the season they started the B1G with a win @IND. I was pretty pumped at that time. I remember their 2nd overall, 1st B1G loss came against ILL about a week or so later. Then the wheels came off and they lost 4-5 in a row and were bubble city the rest of the way.

 

[Xerxes]

Spot on. It was far more than a block a game contribution. The shooter would drive the lane and think twice. Or he'd get up and end up throwing a jump pass or drastically changing the angle of his shot. Hansen was just in a completely different league defensively than the guys we have now and people have to be blind or willfully ignorant to think otherwise.

While I believe this year's team would handle the 2005-2006 team, I'd agree that Hansen and Henderson's defense was far better than this team's counterparts and i think Woodbury and MG are solid on D. Woodbury can play very well at times on D. That 2005-2006 team overall was great defensively but they did have the advantage of playing against a horrible B1G. This team doesn't.

 

[wundergrape]

Dude can call me all the names he wants. I'll state *firmly* that I would take Hansen over our current twosome and then take them back when Woody's a Junior and a viable option for Fran. We'd lose a few lob plays that Olaseni finishes, and they would probably be deferred to Aaron White. The big problems begin when people think gazing at Blocks and Steals will tell the story of their defensive prowess. You know how the guy with all the INTs on your team likely isn't the most effective DB? Or why a baseball player's Errors are about the worst stat to judge them by (unless there's something abnormal). Defense is subjected to the eye test, which I'm positive what's his face did not do. It's impossible to have watched that team and then reduce Hansen's defensive prowess to "meh, a block a game".

On that note, this portion of the conversation is over. Gotta watch to compare.

First of all, I didn't call you anything, I called O'Keefe4prez delusional.

Second, Erek Hansen was a timid head-case who (in more minutes) has worse stats across the board (sans blocks) than Olaseni, and who is outclassed by Woodbury (in fewer minutes) in every category but points and blocks. Hansen's offensive efficiency number that season (102) is also lower than Woodbury this year (108) and Olaseni (115).

Third, I agree with you that defensive prowess is not determined by block numbers. Woodbury is twice the off-the ball defender that Hansen was. He's tougher and has better court awareness.

 

[okeefe4prez]

While I believe this year's team would handle the 2005-2006 team, I'd agree that Hansen and Henderson's defense was far better than this team's counterparts and i think Woodbury and MG are solid on D. Woodbury can play very well at times on D. That 2005-2006 team overall was great defensively but they did have the advantage of playing against a horrible B1G. This team doesn't.

Um, yeah, I don't know how good the B1G is this year, either. Not to rain on anyone's parade, but the only reason I think Iowa has an outside shot at winning the conference is because we lost a ton of incredible talent to the draft after last season. I mean, I've watched Northwestern live and that ball club is every bit as bad as the teams Lick was rolling out and those guys have beaten Illinois and Indiana. OSU just lost to Nebraska. The conference is a shell of what it was last year.

 

[hawkeye12345]

I'm not sure I would take Erek Hansen as a 5th Year Senior (05-06) over Woody (2nd Year Sophomore) and Olaseni (3rd Year Junior) today. Erek was very one-dimensional as a player. His only job was to stay planted in the middle on the defensive side of the court. The ball would rarely pass through him and he wasn't a very good passer once he touched it.

Erek pretty much sucked donkey testi's until his 4th year (jr) and 5th year (sr).