Baylor vs Iowa for all the marbles in NIT Gamethread On ESPN @ 8 PM

[Sammy11]

split Iowa has very little athleticism, even you have to admit that. they are a bunch of awkward looking white guys that play team D to stay in games. Their low scoring vs competent teams is a reflection of their lack of athleticism.

Baylor dominated that game solely due to having better athletes. It certainly was not due to coaching, as scott drew is a terrible coach.

Sigh... Drew is a good coach. Recently his talent has been overrated and people judge him based on assumptions of talent he does not have on his roster. He gets a couple 1 and done players but they usually aren't drafted on production but rather potential. These are good freshmen but so are non-departees. So yes he's getting "NBA talents" but when they aren't anywhere near producing at an NBA level it's not the best indicator of his coaching. The on-court production isn't that different than one of your better 3rd year players who isn't quite as touted a recruit but has developed.

Rewind a few years ago and he was considered a good coach back when it was the first couple of turnaround years. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Baylor had some advantages over Iowa athletically but the truth was Drew outcoached Iowa. He put his players (who have shown significant flaws this year as a group) in a position to succeed and Iowa put theirs up against a brick wall. They didn't put our bigs out of their defensive comfort zone and it allowed them to alter shots and ultimately the game.

 

[mikem]

Sigh... Drew is a good coach. Recently his talent has been overrated and people judge him based on assumptions of talent he does not have on his roster. He gets a couple 1 and done players but they usually aren't drafted on production but rather potential. These are good freshmen but so are non-departees. So yes he's getting "NBA talents" but when they aren't anywhere near producing at an NBA level it's not the best indicator of his coaching. The on-court production isn't that different than one of your better 3rd year players who isn't quite as touted a recruit but has developed.

Rewind a few years ago and he was considered a good coach back when it was the first couple of turnaround years. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

Baylor had some advantages over Iowa athletically but the truth was Drew outcoached Iowa. He put his players (who have shown significant flaws this year as a group) in a position to succeed and Iowa put theirs up against a brick wall. They didn't put our bigs out of their defensive comfort zone and it allowed them to alter shots and ultimately the game.

Yeah let's not really get into Drew's coaching ability. I like the guy. Think he has done amazing work with what he inherited, and has gone through.

I think in this situation, it's more that all we have heard is how great franny is. He got his team up to play some good teams that took beating them for granted his 2nd year, and he's Auerbach, Wooden, Jackson, an K all rolled into one.

He consistently got his *** kicked on the sidelines this year. He has shown repeatedly that he would rather throw a fit than coach during crunch time.

 

[ajk4st8]

The only thing that matters in the NIT is when teams actually care to be playing in it. It has a lot less to do with how good someone is. Baylor and Iowa seemed to play hard. Teams like Kentucky did not.

 

[Sammy11]

The only thing that matters in the NIT is when teams actually care to be playing in it. It has a lot less to do with how good someone is. Baylor and Iowa seemed to play hard. Teams like Kentucky did not.

Kentucky is a joke this year after they lost Noel. We beat them back then and would dominate them now.

 

[VeloClone]

Okay, Sammy, I've thought about it and still don't understand your point. Players aren't playing up to the potential of their talent and the coaching has nothing to do with it? I understand one and dones, but didn't he have non-freshmen who left after last year who were still underperforming all of the predictions many of the analysts had for them?

I'm not slamming you, I just want to understand your point...

 

[Cyclonefan710]

You did?

I doubt it.

I heard if from every hawk fan I know. You're oblivious if you never heard it.

 

[peteypie]

Do I need to put my hand in getting this thread closed too? For god's sake, it's Baylor and Iowa. How is this thread still going? 2 teams I don't care about, although I enjoy when Iowa loses more just because of it's fans. But Scott Drew losing brings a smile to my face too.

 

[Sammy11]

Okay, Sammy, I've thought about it and still don't understand your point. Players aren't playing up to the potential of their talent and the coaching has nothing to do with it? I understand one and dones, but didn't he have non-freshmen who left after last year who were still underperforming all of the predictions many of the analysts had for them?

I'm not slamming you, I just want to understand your point...

1- Main point is the talent is dramatically overrated. People run with the assumption of far more than he actually has to work with. Deuce Bello is the textbook example. A 4-star recruit per the services that is athletic but thats it... no shooting, ball handling, or passing skills to speak of. He's come a long way since arriving but he's far from the talent he was rated as.

2- Drew certainly isn't perfect. As I said before the truth is probably in between the "he can't coach" mantra that's popular now and the "he's one of the best coaches around" mantra that was around when this thing was first turned around with pretty average recruiting hauls pulling upsets over more talented programs.

3- I can't think of one non-freshman that failed to live up to his NBA prospects under Drew. Lace Dunn, Jerrells, Carter, Acy, Udoh, and others seemed to fall right into what you'd expect. Honestly the only clear case where his coaching significantly helped or hurt a prospect was taking Udoh from an offensive liability in his transfer sit-out year into an all around player that became a top 10 NBA pick after he transferred from Michigan.

4- Biggest issue for Drew has been landing quality guards and/or evaluating them. IMO he's getting too caught up in landing the NBA ready guys that he's missing completely on the good NCAA players who other programs land by getting in on early. Other than Jackson the last 3 years or so has been one whiff after another and a bunch of one-dimensional guys that are at best role players. 2010-11 was killed by having no PG and the last 2 years were held back by not having a 2 guard capable of creating their own shot.


... Also if you want to keep chatting on this I get the sense others want this thread to die so send me a PM if you want to keep discussing it.

 

[cycloneG]

This thread is uncomfortable. It's like watching two neighbors have an argument in your yard.

 

[Go2Guy]

Do I need to put my hand in getting this thread closed too? For god's sake, it's Baylor and Iowa. How is this thread still going? 2 teams I don't care about, although I enjoy when Iowa loses more just because of it's fans. But Scott Drew losing brings a smile to my face too.

I'd rather see this on my front page than the mafia gaming.

 

[CyTwins]

Teams typically do improve, so I'd agree with this.



You didn't actually back up your point that Iowa is a team of terrible athletes, other than saying Iowa's best player is a ginger. So, until you actually can prove your point, I'll continue responding with pointless posts that vaguely pick on a random comment you made.

When Zach McCabe averages over 15 minutes per game its pretty hard to justify your Hoks as either "good" or "athletic"

 

[SplitIdentity]

When Zach McCabe averages over 15 minutes per game its pretty hard to justify your Hoks as either "good" or "athletic"

So the conclusion is, there is no actual evidence, but rather "if so and so averages this many minutes..." type justifications. That's cute. Dumb and irrelevant, but cute.

This thread is redundant, I'll going to stop posting in it now.

 

[CyTwins]

So the conclusion is, there is no actual evidence, but rather "if so and so averages this many minutes..." type justifications. That's cute. Dumb and irrelevant, but cute.

This thread is redundant, I'll going to stop posting in it now.

OK how about this for evidence. Ogelsby, McCabe, and Woodbury are not athletic at all. All average over 15 mins a game. If those aren't facts what do you what someone to do, go hold a combine at historic Carver Hawkeye Arena and give you their 40 times and verticals? I mean what other evidence are you looking for?

 

[VeloClone]

3- I can't think of one non-freshman that failed to live up to his NBA prospects under Drew. Lace Dunn, Jerrells, Carter, Acy, Udoh, and others seemed to fall right into what you'd expect. Honestly the only clear case where his coaching significantly helped or hurt a prospect was taking Udoh from an offensive liability in his transfer sit-out year into an all around player that became a top 10 NBA pick after he transferred from Michigan.

... Also if you want to keep chatting on this I get the sense others want this thread to die so send me a PM if you want to keep discussing it.

Frankly, I was thinking more along the lines of players who had stuck around for two or more years and were still playing at Baylor under expectations. I think it can reflect badly on a coach if under his watch a player is still struggling or playing wildly inconsistently but when he gets a chance in the NBA "based on potential rather than production" he succeeds under different coaching in the league.

If posters don't want to participate in this thread, they should be aware that they aren't required to click and open it. If this was about two teams that ISU played this year who weren't Baylor and (especially) Iowa, I'm sure there wouldn't be nearly as much squawking about the thread still being around.

 

[Bobber]

OK how about this for evidence. Ogelsby, McCabe, and Woodbury are not athletic at all. All average over 15 mins a game. If those aren't facts what do you what someone to do, go hold a combine at historic Carver Hawkeye Arena and give you their 40 times and verticals? I mean what other evidence are you looking for?

The problem is how do you measure "athletic". You can't really. It's a subjective term. You're giving split a pretty easy argument to argue(which he likes to do anyway.) Let it go.

 

[Sammy11]

Frankly, I was thinking more along the lines of players who had stuck around for two or more years and were still playing at Baylor under expectations. I think it can reflect badly on a coach if under his watch a player is still struggling or playing wildly inconsistently but when he gets a chance in the NBA "based on potential rather than production" he succeeds under different coaching in the league.

The only ones with a really high NBA billing were Perry Jones, Quincy Miller, and Isaiah Austin. Each put up solid numbers as freshmen but play post positions. Their lack of strength tends to catch up to them there and it's only natural that they grow into their bodies and skill set. I don't see any of the 3's production as any slight on Drew. It simply is what it is- a young player needing time to mature physically.

As for ones who stayed longer who specifically had a big NBA billing?
Carter- Too small/slow
Dunn- Late 2nd at best
Udoh- Probably the biggest player development feather in Drew's cap. His staff transformed the guy on offense for the better.
Lomers- Too slow & fatigue prone for NBA.
Acy- Playing with Toronto and showed significant annual improvement here.

If posters don't want to participate in this thread, they should be aware that they aren't required to click and open it. If this was about two teams that ISU played this year who weren't Baylor and (especially) Iowa, I'm sure there wouldn't be nearly as much squawking about the thread still being around.

Either way I am just trying to be respectful as a guest. I know the BU boards aren't appreciative when opposing fans are tone deaf and I assume it's the same thing here.

 

[RezClone]

Why would it? One bad game doesn't change a thing. Iowa will still be a darkhorse B1G championship contender, and Iowa State will be lucky to make the NIT.

Yes, I'm an ISU fan. but I'm also a fan of my home state and our success as a people. Provided the Cyclones aren't also playing at the same time, I always tune in to Iowa basketball when it's on. I enjoy watching them do well and issue them no ill-will (except to lose to ISU, of course).

I have watched every televised game featuring Iowa or Iowa State, respectively. Seeing as how I have eyes, a soul, a conscious, and a functioning brain, my human nature has taken issue with this "assessment" of the state of affairs in both respective programs and the impact it will have on the upcoming season for both teams.

This may be the single densest comment in all of existence. This comment may be the densest possible utterance allowable under the pervading laws of physics. It is like a singularity of ridiculousness. It's impossible to tell if you're assessment offends the human condition and collective basketball conscience more from of a lack of objectiveness or from a lack of basketball acuity.

 

[State43]

Holy thread resurrection. That is why I used that comment in my signature. Oh Tavernhoks

 

[jmb]

Yes, I'm an ISU fan. but I'm also a fan of my home state and our success as a people. Provided the Cyclones aren't also playing at the same time, I always tune in to Iowa basketball when it's on. I enjoy watching them do well and issue them no ill-will (except to lose to ISU, of course).

I have watched every televised game featuring Iowa or Iowa State, respectively. Seeing as how I have eyes, a soul, a conscious, and a functioning brain, my human nature has taken issue with this "assessment" of the state of affairs in both respective programs and the impact it will have on the upcoming season for both teams.

This may be the single densest comment in all of existence. This comment may be the densest possible utterance allowable under the pervading laws of physics. It is like a singularity of ridiculousness. It's impossible to tell if you're assessment offends the human condition and collective basketball conscience more from of a lack of objectiveness or from a lack of basketball acuity.

Black Hole Cores May Not Be Infinitely Dense | Inside Science

 

[WalkingCY]

What happened? Did Baylor just dunk on the squawks easily again? NIT! NIT!