Seth53
Well-Known Member
Yes, I'd have to research them to know they didn't perform well until their JR/SR year.
Quite frankly, that's a sign of having lots of other things to do in my life other than spending it on the internet.
Woodbury has regressed
- Thread starter glidinghawk
- Start date
- Status
Yes, I'd have to research them to know they didn't perform well until their JR/SR year.
Quite frankly, that's a sign of having lots of other things to do in my life other than spending it on the internet.
Jjgoiowa11
Well-Known Member
Cool story. Tm3308 posts some good stats and you ask if they're bigs? Haha comedy, yeah he's gonna make a post comparing blue chip point guards to a 7ft blue chip center. Good one, seth....keep it up sport
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Yes, all of those guys were bigs (6'10" or taller). I'd love to see the numbers on your second question, too. But that will take quite a bit of time to research.
Seth53
Well-Known Member
Another quality post there gigolo.
I'll be more patient at this point awaiting for the swan to appear based upon quality data presented in the thread. Hats off TM and SportsTalent.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
I've gone back and looked up all the top 50 big men (6'10 or taller) going back to the class of 2003, using Rivals as my source (I think we can agree it's been the most accurate of the services that go back that far). I'll get to looking at stats for those players later, but I think you'd be surprised by just how many of them you've never heard of. Apparently, judging big men is very difficult, because the only guys that I've found who were major contributors right away (that I knew off the top of my head, anyway) were the guys ranked in the top 10 overall (Oden, Anthony Davis, etc.).
bcl20
Well-Known Member
I think Woodbury is added strength and better touch away from being really, really good. He'll get stronger and his touch on shots looks pretty good really, I think his jumpers and hook shots will fall by the time he's a senior. His release at the free throw line looks better too.
clicheusername3
Banned
It's just not a "big mans" game any more. You can't use past examples because guys like Jepsen, Earl, and Lohaus; the staff actually wanted them to develop in to something that they could excel at. The game just isn't played that way anymore.
Why have a 7 footer that can't get out of his own way and can't shoot when you can have a guy that's 6'8" and can dribble, shoot the 3 and defend 3 positions, 4 inches doesn't really mean crap when guys have 7 1/2 foot wingspans. There's just not enough time or any reason to develop a classic big man any longer. That's why generally you see more guys like Woodbury turn into 5 fouls rather than double doubles.
It's no indictment on Woodbury it's not his fault it's just the way basketball is going in general.
I don't. Please compare Rivals to ESPN and how each service's rankings correlate to college success including individual tempo free statistics, some component of team defensive ranking (you'll have to work out the details on that one) and quality of competition. Also, please clearly mark which players are bigs.
TIA.
clicheusername3
Banned
I've gone in and done the research on this. The overall quality correlation based on the random geometric distress rule of algabreic logic was markedly swayed by the intended deviation caused when diverging the adjusted tempo over the team defense to quantify a Meranthic cycle that would give us a proper mean-based quanti-data metric which could be used to properly center and adjust the indocentric plane on the oliomorphic graph. In building the graph several subconal palimonial groups emerged which gave us some clues to the final solution. In the end, the basic hyper-randomness could not be overcome to find a strict standard Overton-Humphries variation on the hidden median, resulting in me banging your sister.
Jjgoiowa11
Well-Known Member
tm3308
Well-Known Member
I said of the recruiting services that go back 10 years. Maybe I'm wrong, but I didn't think ESPN's recruiting rankings were particularly respected in the early part of the decade. They might be the best now, but they didn't used to be; I just stuck with one recruiting service because it was a more fair comparison that way.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
I am SO glad I persevered and read clear to the end of this.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
I think there's a lot of truth in this, too. But as I said, there are quite a few guys, just in the last few years, who also took time to really come into their own. Tyler Zeller was ACC POY, for crying out loud. A good big man is still a great asset to have. It's just that it might not always be worth the wait to develop them, when you can get the flex guys who can make an instant impact and still get better with development.
Your argument is different than the original one. Saying that even if Woody develops into a very good/great big man by the time he's a senior, it's not worth the time/effort in development when looking at the big picture, isn't the same as saying he's never going to develop into that player.
I haven't seen a post this long with such a few amount of periods since herby.
TexMcGruder
Well-Known Member
Does anyone remember Les Jepsen? That feller took nearly half a decade to develop. By his senior year he was a force. Early on, he fumbled 'round and was still gettin' used to his 7 foot frame too.
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
Big men are tough to judge and miss most often. Here is another one and he was in the top 5: John Henson, he developed some and is very athletic, but didn't really do anything until the last half of his Junior season and had a pretty solid Senior year.
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
I wasn't insulting you, tm listed some guys and gave their stats...it wasn't really an 'exercise' that was needed, it was already done. If you don't know who those guys are, then I question how much basketball you have watched that isn't Hawkeye basketball in the last 40 years. One of them played against Iowa a few times in his career.
WindsorHawk
Well-Known Member
I remember and he wasn't anywhere near where Woodbury is now...not even close.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
Woodbury (and Olaseni) don't have to score a ton of points to be a driving force at Iowa. Rebounding, clogging up the middle, and intimidating shots (like Bill Russell). Maybe, if you want them to go to the NBA, they need more offense. Plenty of other Hawks are capable enough to pick up the offense.
HomerChampless
Well-Known Member
Uthoff is a 3. McCabe would be better at center than Uthoff.
- Status
