Knight78
Well-Known Member
At least against high school competition.
Who's the starting five next year?
- Thread starter franstheman
- Start date
At least against high school competition.
I'm hoping one day that Pat might become a Darryl Moore type player for us and it would be a matter if there is still a place in the rotation for that type of player? Fun to ponder anyway with his athleticism.
Knight78
Well-Known Member
I didn't see it that way this season. There were two things I saw that Woody's game lacked.
1. Strength. He needs to hit the weights. It's typical to see guys this big with the skill set he has lack physical strength. Hitting the weights this off season will help his game immensely.
2. He doesn't have a "dunk" mentality. When White gets around the basket, most of the time it's a dunk. Woody tried too many times to lay up the ball or finger roll the ball when he should have been thinking "DUNK!!!". This, however, will improve with strength.
And while Gabe had some nice games, he's out of position a LOT on defense, almost as much as White.
WindsorHawk
Well-Known Member
There's no down side. There is no requirement to keep him 5 years. I'm not saying push him out the door. He will likely opt to move on with his life if he's not going to play. I'm fine with whatever Fran opts to do. Ingram may have to come in and win a game for us next year. Who knows.
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
I like how Ingram is being written off already.
Ingram will most likely win games for us by preparing our guard court with his defense in practices. By his senior year, he will probably make some important defensive plays in games himself.
For an absolute best case scenario of Ingram with Iowa I look back to Andre Banks in the 80s. He was a defensive player who, when he came to Iowa, couldn't really dribble or shoot. By his senior year, he was Iowa's starting PG, could obviously dribble by then and hit an open shot. Probably his finest moment was leading IA to a victory over a prominent Bob Knight IN team. That's Ingram's absolute upper ceiling of course.
Section136
Well-Known Member
Hes not being written off. People are giving their opinion and just dont think Ingram will be much of a contributor to the program outside of busting his *** in practice and playing spot minutes becuase of foul trouble or injury. There is nothing wrong with that role and just doing that he would have 99% of us beat in contributions to Iowa basketball.
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
When people project things on a kid that wasn't able to be around last Summer to focus on academics and then came in out of shape...how can you judge him really as a player with his limited minutes this season? I have nothing wrong with him not ever being a starter, it has never been my point.
It is funny to say, oh why let him tie up a scholly for a better player? How does anyone know that freshman coming in after Ingram will be a bigger contributor than Ingram as a Senior, or RS Junior. It is pretty difficult to act like that is going to happen.
The No.1 problem with Iowa basketball in the last decade has been player retention. If Ingram redshirts, it means he buys in 100% with what the coaching staff is thinking. Having players on campus as long as possible is one of the reasons Wisconsin is so consistent, they plug in a new player ever couple years and a good share of them sat out for a year.
I think he would have redshirted last season if Fran would have thought May was going to contribute the way he did. Think about this as well, if someone were to get hurt the redshirt could be pulled as well. Iowa has enough backcourt players at this time, but injuries can derail that thought.
Year 3 will be Ingram's year, unless Fran hits some major home runs at the 2-guard spot in the next two seasons. If history means anything, upperclassmen who are prepared to play allow the youngsters to just play basketball and not pressure themselves. Fran has hit a couple home runs close to home, the other HR's he is looking for aren't so close for the 2014 class. Ulis a PG is, not sure who the next guys are at the 2-3 spot that are the staffs ultimate focus.
WindsorHawk
Well-Known Member
I do think he will be a contributor...or at least could be. It's hard to say since he's a true freshman and didn't play all that much. I want to redshirt the kid and see what he can become. I don't agree with the logic that he's tying up someone else's scholarship. Iowa recruited him. Iowa wanted him. He came to Iowa. Could we give him more than 7 months before making a final decision...even if it is just message board chatter with no bearing whatsoever on what will happen.
Right now I think ingram should redshirt. And while he is redshirting work on being a pg...that way when clemmons and gesell graduate he will be left as a sr pg that can allow a young pg to sit a yr or be the experience back up behind a good young pg.
Heck he could easily be a contributor this yr or later if he develops some pg ability as I am far from convinced clemmons is that great. I think ingram could easily pass clemmons on the depth chart with work.
Heck he could easily be a contributor this yr or later if he develops some pg ability as I am far from convinced clemmons is that great. I think ingram could easily pass clemmons on the depth chart with work.
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
Tyler Ulis may have something to say about that, in a recent interview he is planning on visiting Iowa again sooner, rather than later. Keep Ingram at the 2-spot, he has the athleticism to play there, Iowa can go small with him in the lineup as well. He did play a little PG this year, so his ball handling is not too bad for starters.
I really do want him to redshirt because I think he can be a good player in his career; in the limited amount of playing time he did get, he looked like he hadn't been playing. Some questionable decisions with the ball in his hands, but also showed some flashes of explosiveness going to the basket. Ingram looks to be the athletic type and that has been missing at Iowa, weather he is a limited player in his career or not, he looks like a wing and he needs to work on his outside shot and court awareness.
WindsorHawk
Well-Known Member
We agree that Ingram should redshirt but not on Clemmons. I think the sky is the limit for Clemmons. I don't see Ingram ever passing him.
Section136
Well-Known Member
Nice post and we will just agree to disagree on what we think Ingram will contribute the rest of his career.
RocknRollface
Well-Known Member
Totally different players IMO. Moore was 6'4 rebounder who was a walkon and couldn't really do anything at the time but jump.
Ingram is a guard who played at one of the best highschools in the country and was considered good enough to be an allstar in Indiana, one of the top 2 or 3 basketball producing states in the country.
Not specifically talking to you but in general people need to get a grip. The dude didn't play this year because there was no playing time available, its that simple. Fran specifically said he did not want to play more than 10. Pat was behind a bunch of players who have been here longer at the 2\3 spot and unlike Gessel and Clemmons he is not a point guard. There is absolutely no mystery to why he didn't play.
He will contribute when he gets the chance, hes the most athletic guard on the team, hes an excellent on ball defender and can slash to the basket.
Do you people really expect Fran to play more than 10 when 10 was already arguably to much?
RocknRollface
Well-Known Member
Agreed. I do think hes a little to hesitant at times to go up strong but thats mostly a product of being very aware of his own physical limitations.
Now Gabe on the other hand, good grief. He should automatically have to run sprints for every time he attempts a layup rather than a dunk whether he makes it or not.
RocknRollface
Well-Known Member
I agree with these thoughts.
It looked like Clemons was a really smart player at first and thats why he was playing so much and even starting, but he really fell apart.
Ingram is bigger stronger and more explosive, It would be nice if he could play point but he may not have the proper mentality.
The main thing separating them this year was one showed up early one showed up late and out of shape.
Stanzi
Well-Known Member
Agreed. Clemmons made a lot of bonehead turnovers, and I mean a lot, but that can be fixed, and his upside is exciting.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Totally agree on your first point. Woody didn't play soft this year; he just got pushed around by guys who were considerably stronger than he was. But he had a lot of fight in him, and didn't back down.
Woody isn't an explosive athlete. He's a good athlete in terms of running the floor; he does that very well for a guy his size. But the explosive hops aren't there for him to consistently dunk in traffic. Olaseni has those hops, and is by all accounts the best athlete on the team. Woody will never be like that; but that doesn't mean he can't still be an excellent, even dominating college player before he's done.
Olaseni's defensive positioning was inconsistent, but the potential is there. I specifically remember a play against MSU in Chicago that happened right in front of me in press row, where he made an absolutely perfect rotation to help off a screen. He's capable of doing things right. It's just a matter of getting everything down. And if the improvement he made over the course of the season is any indication, I think he'll figure things out and be a force by the time he graduates.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
It seemed like a lot of his turnovers came on sloppy post feeds. Considering that Valentine did a lot of the ball handling in high school, that might not be something Clemmons had to do a whole lot. He's much more comfortable (and effective) running fast breaks. IMO, that's a good thing. Feeding the post can be learned. But with the way he leads a break, you've either got it or you don't. And in this system, you better have it.
