Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 31
  1. #16
    Walk On
    Points: 5,745, Level: 22
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 305
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    129
    Points
    5,745
    Level
    22
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 3
    Given: 6

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    Quote Originally Posted by psychlone99 View Post
    Not to distract from you point, but I think who is in the starting 5 is somewhat overanalyzed. McGee is averaging 24 minutes, which is fourth highest on the team behind Babb, Clyburn, and Lucious. I think that is appropriate.

    And, for the record, I think the hand-wringing over Clyburn is a bit premature at this point. He may turn out to be a disappointment, but I think some of our worries may seem a bit silly in due time.

    Overall, I think the rotation and minutes are being handled pretty well. We just need to get better at some of the fundamentals: turnovers and, to a lesser degree, free throws. I think we have room for improvement defensively as well.
    This is correct, minutes are what matter, not "starting"



  2. #17
    Rookie
    Points: 8,500, Level: 27
    Level completed: 59%, Points required for next Level: 250
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Des Moines
    Posts
    435
    Points
    8,500
    Level
    27
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 6
    Given: 5

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    Because he is a difference maker defensively outside. I give him a chance to totally shut down McLemore McGruder or McClellan.

    I am going to assume he was paid to throw the Iowa game or something since it was such a disgraceful performance and apart from that game he really hasn't been a disappointment, move on, and not hold it against him and have my fingers crossed that the tall rangy 20 point a game scorer shows up for Big 12 play. Outside of that one game he's been OK for a guy that new to the team and didn't play for a year pretty good D that hopefully continues to improve and good rebounding.

    This team has nice size at the perimeter if they get it to click defensively, Lucious decides to play smart, and guys hit 40% of their 3s (they're gonna take tons of them) they should be in every big 12 game. THe teams pretty well built to win games in the 50s. I see a decent amount of second chance points in the conference games as well if everyone, Clyburn in particular is playing hard and crashing the glass offensively. There is no point in getting down on Clyburn hes going to give you points, and that tweener forward position you refer to is well manned by Niang and Ejim.

    The last thought I have about Clyburn and Lucious though is it really sucks that the wrong one of them wants to show off to everyone in the gym that he is the best player on the court every time he touches the ball. I wish it was Will and not Korie that thought he was LeBron/Kobe.



  3. #18
    All-Star
    Points: 17,339, Level: 40
    Level completed: 12%, Points required for next Level: 711
    Overall activity: 6.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,165
    Points
    17,339
    Level
    40
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 20
    Given: 0

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    Unfortunately Clyburn's 3 point shooting hasn''t clicked yet.

    At Utah he shot 5.1 3's per game, made 40.3% and had 10 games with 3 or more 3's.

    Here he has shot 3.5 3's per game, made 28.6% and had one game with more 3 or more 3's.

    If his 3 point shooting returns to where it was at Utah, he will be much more of an impact player.



  4. #19
    Starter
    Points: 17,898, Level: 40
    Level completed: 81%, Points required for next Level: 152
    Overall activity: 2.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    843
    Points
    17,898
    Level
    40
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 10
    Given: 1

    Isn't Clyburn a Forward?

    Sure he has played some minutes at PG when Corie sits, but Clyburn basically plays the wing forward position. IMO that is his best position. He isn't a strong dribbler in traffic and doesn't have the strength to play PF in the Big 12.

    The reality is ISU's offense is a PG, a Post player and 3 interchangeable jump shooters (Babb, Clyburn and Ejim). Each has slightly different strengths: Babb- defense, Clyburn- slasher and Ejim -rebounder, but they are interchangeable.

    As far as Niang playing center- I don't think he has the height or defensive skills to be effective in Big 12 play. We need Gibson & Booker to be solid at center. Niang and McGee can then fill the minutes as the other starters get a break.

    Man- am I jonesing for some Cyclone hoops. One home game in almost a month- hope Fred never schedules that way again!!!!!!



  5. #20
    Pro
    Points: 58,171, Level: 74
    Level completed: 75%, Points required for next Level: 379
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran50000 Experience Points
    jahfg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Ames
    Posts
    2,695
    Points
    58,171
    Level
    74
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 13
    Given: 10

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    Is Clyburn in an unlucky shooting slump or is 28% from three what we're going to get? I think the success of the team might depend on the answer to that question.


    I don't bring my own opinions, just attack others.

  6. #21
    Addict
    Points: 94,544, Level: 95
    Level completed: 74%, Points required for next Level: 506
    Overall activity: 28.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    cyclones500's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    8,797
    Points
    94,544
    Level
    95
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 159
    Given: 373

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    Although it's uncertain how many dividends it will pay over the full season, isn't it nice we can debate merits of so many legitimate lineup permutations?



  7. #22
    Hall-Of-Famer
    Points: 42,898, Level: 63
    Level completed: 96%, Points required for next Level: 52
    Overall activity: 10.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    heitclone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Malvern, IA
    Posts
    4,448
    Points
    42,898
    Level
    63
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 56
    Given: 143

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    I think we have some matchups that this would work with, but IMO it would really only work as long as either Booker or Percy was at the 5. Will and either Ejim or Niang would be a great offensive lineup but not so much on defense.



  8. #23
    Speechless
    Points: 727,959, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 79.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranCreated Album pictures50000 Experience PointsOverdrive
    Cyclonepride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    A pineapple under the sea
    Posts
    47,046
    Points
    727,959
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 1,071
    Given: 571

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    I think Freddie sees the preconference season as a time to experiment with different looks and positions. Pretty sure he will have everyone in the best position to succeed when it gets real (which is very shortly).



  9. #24
    Bench Warmer
    Points: 2,281, Level: 13
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 169
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    andymhallman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Fairfield, Iowa
    Posts
    227
    Points
    2,281
    Level
    13
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 5
    Given: 40

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    Quote Originally Posted by jahfg View Post
    Is Clyburn in an unlucky shooting slump or is 28% from three what we're going to get? I think the success of the team might depend on the answer to that question.
    He was actually very good last year, shooting over 40 percent. He is also our best free throw shooter, making 82 percent from the line. Korie makes 80 percent and the rest of the team shoots under 70. I probably shouldn't have been so hard on Clyburn considering all his strengths, but man that dribbling!



  10. #25
    Hall-Of-Famer
    Points: 49,824, Level: 69
    Level completed: 6%, Points required for next Level: 1,326
    Overall activity: 4.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran25000 Experience Points
    GoSTATE71's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,680
    Points
    49,824
    Level
    69
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 30
    Given: 5

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    I think Will Clyburn kind of sucks. He just disappears. He had like 3 good games this year, but he's so one dimensional, put a little pressure on him and he has no game. McGee is a way better player, I don't care what anyone says. Clyburn was overrated coming here, and playing in a weak Mountain West conference made him seem like some unstoppable scorer but he isn't. Ill bet anyone he averages less then 10 ppg in the big 12. Start McGee, at least he looks like he cares. Clyburn looks like he could care less



  11. #26
    All-Star
    Points: 48,264, Level: 67
    Level completed: 94%, Points required for next Level: 86
    Overall activity: 3.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassVeteran25000 Experience Points
    Thompsonclone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Ames
    Posts
    1,950
    Points
    48,264
    Level
    67
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 125
    Given: 62

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    Quote Originally Posted by GoSTATE71 View Post
    I think Will Clyburn kind of sucks. He just disappears. He had like 3 good games this year, but he's so one dimensional, put a little pressure on him and he has no game. McGee is a way better player, I don't care what anyone says. Clyburn was overrated coming here, and playing in a weak Mountain West conference made him seem like some unstoppable scorer but he isn't. Ill bet anyone he averages less then 10 ppg in the big 12. Start McGee, at least he looks like he cares. Clyburn looks like he could care less
    Clyburn had a good second half. I will take that bet any second. Clyburn will average 10+ points in conference play. Did people expect him to come in and average 20? Clyburn stepped up huge in the second half. We don't win without him. Clyburn, McGee and Niang were huge. All three should start.

    What is wrong with 17 points, 6 rebounds, 4 assists and only 2 turnovers? Should have had 25, 15, 8 and 0 turnovers huh?


    Last edited by Thompsonclone; 01-01-2013 at 03:11 PM.

  12. #27
    Walk On
    Points: 5,745, Level: 22
    Level completed: 39%, Points required for next Level: 305
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    129
    Points
    5,745
    Level
    22
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 3
    Given: 6

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheBentStick View Post
    I think Clyburn would seem a lot better to us if CFH would stop using him as the backup PG. I'd bet most of his turnovers are when he plays that position. He's at his best when someone else feeds him the ball. But, I respect CFH, so we'll see how it plays out.

    Who do you want to play backup pg?



  13. #28
    Addict
    Points: 94,544, Level: 95
    Level completed: 74%, Points required for next Level: 506
    Overall activity: 28.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    cyclones500's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    8,797
    Points
    94,544
    Level
    95
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 159
    Given: 373

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    Quote Originally Posted by Thompsonclone21 View Post
    Clyburn had a good second half. I will take that bet any second. Clyburn will average 10+ points in conference play. Did people expect him to come in and average 20? Clyburn stepped up huge in the second half. We don't win without him. Clyburn, McGee and Niang were huge. All three should start.

    What is wrong with 17 points, 6 rebounds, 4 assists and only 2 turnovers? Should have had 25, 15, 8 and 0 turnovers huh?
    That's the sense I get about Clyburn — he's capable of huge scoring games, and will average in double figures, but it might be 29 points one game and 6 the next. Some players can average 12 ppg and hover near that a few baskets either way; others are at 14-ish but individual games vary at extremes.

    Key is to tap into his explosive abilities, not rely on him to carry the load game-to-game.



  14. #29
    Starter
    Points: 20,325, Level: 43
    Level completed: 53%, Points required for next Level: 425
    Overall activity: 1.0%
    Achievements:
    10000 Experience PointsSocial1 year registered

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Atkins
    Posts
    626
    Points
    20,325
    Level
    43
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 5

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    By the way, quick note, a fair amount of the second half when we made our run, Clyburn was playing power forward, and also for part of it, he was playing point



  15. #30
    Legend
    Points: 166,671, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 40.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteran50000 Experience Points
    The_Architect's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Focus Town
    Posts
    11,323
    Points
    166,671
    Level
    100
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 217
    Given: 831

    Re: Why not play Clyburn at forward?

    I wish we could play Will at the 4. Unfortunately though we need Melvin out there for his hustle and intangibles. If we are going to do anything in conference play, Will has to start hitting the 3 ball consistently. Him and Babb have been throwing up a lot of bricks.


    Last edited by The_Architect; 01-02-2013 at 11:57 AM.
    While on live TV, Ford used a vulgar term to describe a private part of the female anatomy, adding that he was “happily married” and “got more than enough to eat at home.”

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
  • Football
  • Iowa State vs. North Dakota State
  • August 30, 2014
  • 11:00 AM