Did you catch the .......Who's a better hire, McCaffery or Hoiberg

[mt85]

I'm just being honest, he let the last 2 minutes play out with DG completely lost and we saw the results. Im not bashing FH nor do I think he's a bad coach because of it but to me theres no arguing those 2 situations were examples of where a coach needs to be in control of the game. Freddie knows the game, he knows his X's and O's I dont doubt that, the game is still just moving very quickly for him in his first season. I think people underestimate how fast the game moves for coaches, heck Ive only ever coached at the high school and Jr high level and even then the game moves much faster than youd think. I can't imagine how overwhelming it would be to coach at that level, let alone being his first job and the fact he's look at as a savior to most ISU fans. But like I said, I think Freddie was a great hire and even if we dont' win a game the rest of the year, he's already created a buzz around the program that had been absent.

...he let the last 2 minutes play out with DG completely lost...




...the game is still just moving very quickly for him in his first season...

Apparently you are omnicient. What a gift.

 

[ca4cy]

Even though sarcastic you hit the nail on the head, he should've called a timeout and drawn up a play or alteast calmed down our PG. Look at the Cal game, when he took control and drew up the play for SC to hit the game tying three...thats a great coaching move and the team executed what was drawn up. The problem was he should have done that about 30 seconds later instead of letting DG run wild. In the UNI game he just watched DG struggle.

Maybe Fred was trying to see how his senior point guard with tons of experience would respond in a tight spot rather than automatically "bailing him out" with a timeout. It was our first true road test of the season and maybe he wanted to see exactly what he had.

A coach's job is to put his team in a position to win. We were, but we didn't. Fred's coaching may or may not have been a factor in our losses, but I'd say the guys on the floor had a lot more to do with them than the guy on the bench.

 

[jdoggivjc]

In both of those games he left TO's on the board, with under 2 minutes and the ball he should have used them. Those are perfect gametime situations for a team to learn how to finish a team off. He let DG nervously dribble around, DG panicked and the results were a turnover without getting a shot up against UNI and a minute of chaos against Cal. IMO those situations are on either DG or FH, I'm going to say its on Fh because DG can only do what he's coached to do. Theres no guarantee we would have won those games but I bet if he had the chance again Freddie would call those timeouts.

And guess what? As he gains more experience he'll learn not to leave those TOs on the board. He's a guy who, before this year, has never coached a game in his life. He's done an excellent job so far this season, especially considering his lack of experience, and making rookie mistakes doesn't change the fact he's done a great job, so far. And it's not like rookie coaches or bad coaches are the only ones that make mistakes - great coaches make mistakes as well. I'm sure Johnny Orr made some tactical mistakes that cost us ball games - are we going to question his "greatness" based on a few mistakes that he made?

Look, I have no idea whether CFH ultimately was the right hire, nor do I know where he's going to take this program in the future. What I do know is collectively he's done a great job so far, especially considering the talent he has to work with, and a few rookie mistakes doesn't change that. Now, if he doesn't learn from those mistakes, then there's cause for concern.

 

[InAWord]

Leaving TOs on the board is not a sign of bad coaching. I personally loved the Eustachy style of not calling a late TO. By calling the TO you are giving your opponent a chance to get organized too. As long as the team know what they're supposed to be doing, keep the clock running and go with the flow.

Now that said, if your team is out of sync and needs a TO call it...but in neither of our loses was that the case. Other than Fred going on the court and hitting the point blank shots DG was missing, I am not really sure what else he could have done.

 

[Ficklone02]

Leaving TOs on the board is not a sign of bad coaching. I personally loved the Eustachy style of not calling a late TO. By calling the TO you are giving your opponent a chance to get organized too. As long as the team know what they're supposed to be doing, keep the clock running and go with the flow.

Now that said, if your team is out of sync and needs a TO call it...but in neither of our loses was that the case. Other than Fred going on the court and hitting the point blank shots DG was missing, I am not really sure what else he could have done.

Kudos to you, this is very true. A TO for the offense, is also a TO for the defense.

 

[Cyrok]

Leaving TOs on the board is not a sign of bad coaching. I personally loved the Eustachy style of not calling a late TO. By calling the TO you are giving your opponent a chance to get organized too. As long as the team know what they're supposed to be doing, keep the clock running and go with the flow.

Now that said, if your team is out of sync and needs a TO call it...but in neither of our loses was that the case. Other than Fred going on the court and hitting the point blank shots DG was missing, I am not really sure what else he could have done.

This is my thought too.

Heitclone is making some good points and Fred himself has said a couple times that he is still thinking about what he could have done differently in the two losses. I prefer letting the senor pg run it without letting the other team set up. And I like how he has given DG confidence and responsibility, and if nothing else, these two losses produced some great teachable moments on film for them to use later in the season.

 

[swarthmoreCY]

It has nothing to do with being defensive. It has to do with being objective and fair. I would say both subjectively and objectively that McCaffrey was starting in a worse spot with Iowa than CFH was with Iowa State, not that either school was in a great position when the respective coaches were hired.

If this is you being objective, you need to spend less time on hawkeyenation or listening to Jon Miller.

Compared to Fred, Fran inherited a better situation. Iowa was going to be better regardless of whether Franny was the coach. In fact, he has ******** that improvement.

-Iowa returned 8 players when Fran was hired (5 starters in Payne, May, Gatens, Cole, and Fuller), had Marble, McCabe and two recruits that ended up going to Wisconsin and Florida already signed by Lick.

-ISU returned 5 players when Fred was hired (2 starters in Garrett and Scotty), had Ejim, Phillips, and Railey signed, and started later in the Spring recruiting period.

Worse spot? It is now, because Fred schooled Fran in the first 8 months (well, 9 for Fran) on the job.

 

[heitclone]

Leaving TOs on the board is not a sign of bad coaching. I personally loved the Eustachy style of not calling a late TO. By calling the TO you are giving your opponent a chance to get organized too. As long as the team know what they're supposed to be doing, keep the clock running and go with the flow.

Now that said, if your team is out of sync and needs a TO call it...but in neither of our loses was that the case. Other than Fred going on the court and hitting the point blank shots DG was missing, I am not really sure what else he could have done.

I'm not saying its bad coaching, just inexperience and not knowing exactly what your PG can and cannot handle, in fact youre second paragraph proves my opinion on the point. IMO the team didn't know what to do and that was obvious by DG reluctance to do anything decisive at the end of both of those games. And like I said when he drew up the 3 for SC in the Cal game it worked perfect.

Either way its an opinion,(hindsight says I'm right) and I have no doubt both of those games were learning experiences for Fred, and perhaps DG. Maybe the next time he'll be more comfortable and the results will be different.

 

[mj4cy]

I disagree some with the first part, good coaching/discipline can bride the gap between the lack of talent, and the best X's and O's coaches shine in crunch time. And so far the lack of "coaching" has been obvious in our 2 losses but you're right no one ever won without talent. And theres no one formula to winning, Freddie is still in the midst of developing his style and is going to have some bumps in the road, but I still think he's a great hire and will make ISU relevant again. I just hope people don't set the bar too high, this program has never been the to place many around here think it has. With the exception of a handful of years ISU has never been a powerhouse or even a team that was always a lock to make the tourney, yet you've people thinking we're going to relive the Fizer/Tinsley years all over again.

And I know its trendy around here to bash any hands on coaching or anything with ties to the DMac era but look at the kind of coach we had in our most successful seasons ever....

I would disagree with what I bolded. I'll take talent anyday over X's and O's. Case in point look at McD's teams vs. Morgan's teams. Both coaches had many many games where we would be tied or close to tied with 3 minutes to go. Morgan didn't get out the clipboard and bog them down with plays, he told Stinson and Blalock to go win. McD would always seem to find a way to coach himself out of the victory.

 

[heitclone]

And guess what? As he gains more experience he'll learn not to leave those TOs on the board. He's a guy who, before this year, has never coached a game in his life. He's done an excellent job so far this season, especially considering his lack of experience, and making rookie mistakes doesn't change the fact he's done a great job, so far. And it's not like rookie coaches or bad coaches are the only ones that make mistakes - great coaches make mistakes as well. I'm sure Johnny Orr made some tactical mistakes that cost us ball games - are we going to question his "greatness" based on a few mistakes that he made?

Look, I have no idea whether CFH ultimately was the right hire, nor do I know where he's going to take this program in the future. What I do know is collectively he's done a great job so far, especially considering the talent he has to work with, and a few rookie mistakes doesn't change that. Now, if he doesn't learn from those mistakes, then there's cause for concern.

I couldn't agree more and I've said everything you've said. I never chalked up the 2 losses to FH being a poor coach, but IMO he made poor decisions those games and the results speak for themselves. I wasn't trying to knock anything FH has done this year, just pointing out that many people around here think "If Dmac did it" then it must be a bad idea. Freddie knows the game, he knows what it takes to win; the X's and O's part is the easy part, knowing when to let your kids play and when to intervene is the biggest challenge.

 

[mt85]

I'm not saying its bad coaching, just inexperience and not knowing exactly what your PG can and cannot handle, in fact youre second paragraph proves my opinion on the point. IMO the team didn't know what to do and that was obvious by DG reluctance to do anything decisive at the end of both of those games. And like I said when he drew up the 3 for SC in the Cal game it worked perfect.

Either way its an opinion,(hindsight says I'm right) and I have no doubt both of those games were learning experiences for Fred, and perhaps DG. Maybe the next time he'll be more comfortable and the results will be different.

No it doesn't.

 

[heitclone]

I would disagree with what I bolded. I'll take talent anyday over X's and O's. Case in point look at McD's teams vs. Morgan's teams. Both coaches had many many games where we would be tied or close to tied with 3 minutes to go. Morgan didn't get out the clipboard and bog them down with plays, he told Stinson and Blalock to go win. McD would always seem to find a way to coach himself out of the victory.

When you look at it as 2 seperate issues sure talent is more important but if talent is equal, I'll take the stronger X's and O's guys every time. An argument that it takes talent to win is pretty redundant, I'm just saying talent gaps (like we have this year) can be bridged by good coaching.

 

[Mclone]

Even though sarcastic you hit the nail on the head, he should've called a timeout and drawn up a play or alteast calmed down our PG. Look at the Cal game, when he took control and drew up the play for SC to hit the game tying three...thats a great coaching move and the team executed what was drawn up. The problem was he should have done that about 30 seconds later instead of letting DG run wild. In the UNI game he just watched DG struggle.

It's easy to say he should've called a timeout in hindsight. Just because you saw a set play work one time doesn't mean it will work every time. For every example you sight were a coach called a timeout and set up a play towards the end of the game, there are numerous examples were a coach's philosophy when down by 3 with some time on the clock is to score a quick 2 because the defense is overly defending the 3 and call the timeout to set up an in-bound trap. In either case execution is the key to success.

I think it's ridiculous to say those losses were due to coaching inexperience. In my opinion they were due to a lack of execution. You've got a 6-5 senior point guard with the ability to get to the basket and score who turned the ball over. Did you stop to think the left over turnovers could be due to the lack of executing this coaching move?

 

[CYinPA]

How is three returning scholarship players a better situation?

How many scholarship players did Iowa return? I honestly don't know. Either way, they certainly had problems with players transferring away from Lickliter much the same way we did with players running from McDermott.

You do not know how many returning players each school had, yet you are telling others it is about being objective, not subjective?
Sounds like you are more about being ignorant. Hard to take your opinion on this matter seriously.

 

[Rural]

So you're in the camp that says we'd be 13-0 if Fred wasn't such a poor coach? You are way overthinking the coaching thing.

 

[CYinPA]

heitclone, you have too many posts to respond to them all. However, there is no need to, as all of them are the same cliche commentary- using commonplace situations that occur to every coach, and labeling them as "the young, novice coach" got out-coached.

Have you ever watched Bill Self? Coach K? Same **** happens.

 

[Cyfan1843]

Think about this NBA vs Seina (I think thats how you spell it) I am going to take the Mayor and the NBA for experiece. anyone else is an idiot.

 

[Ficklone02]

Think about this NBA vs Seina (I think thats how you spell it) I am going to take the Mayor and the NBA for experiece. anyone else is an idiot.

Any college coach that hasn't played in the NBA is an idiot? I doubt thats what you meant, but thats the way it reads to me.

 

[SplitIdentity]

If this is you being objective, you need to spend less time on hawkeyenation or listening to Jon Miller.

Compared to Fred, Fran inherited a better situation. Iowa was going to be better regardless of whether Franny was the coach. In fact, he has ******** that improvement.

-Iowa returned 8 players when Fran was hired (5 starters in Payne, May, Gatens, Cole, and Fuller), had Marble, McCabe and two recruits that ended up going to Wisconsin and Florida already signed by Lick.

-ISU returned 5 players when Fred was hired (2 starters in Garrett and Scotty), had Ejim, Phillips, and Railey signed, and started later in the Spring recruiting period.

Worse spot? It is now, because Fred schooled Fran in the first 8 months (well, 9 for Fran) on the job.

Again, the fact that you really believe what you are typing here is nothing short of amazing.

ISU's starting rotation includes DG (sr), Christopherson (RS JR), Vanderbeeken (RS Sr), Anderson (RS sr), and Ejim (fr).

Iowa's starting rotation includes Gatens (Jr), Cole (Sr), Marble (Fr), May (Soph), Basabe (fr).

Two upper-classmen for Iowa, 4 for ISU. Not to mention, Gatens has been struggling throughout the season with a wrist injury and Payne has been out for the season with a back injury. Iowa has been playing with more returning players, but I ask you this, which one of Iowa's returning players would you have taken before the season over any of the recruits coming in for ISU?

Seriously, you avoided this question last time I asked you. Who would you take from Iowa's team over current ISU players? Don't gimme the "I like the guys we have now because they're Cyclones" line. List them. Iowa's players you truly feel would have started or played significant minutes for ISU, and who they would be taking minutes from.

If you can give a legitimate answer to that question, then I (and many other ISU fans here) would agree with you. Until then, saying Fran came into a better situation than Fred is just wrong, and shows very little intelligence.

 

[heitclone]

heitclone, you have too many posts to respond to them all. However, there is no need to, as all of them are the same cliche commentary- using commonplace situations that occur to every coach, and labeling them as "the young, novice coach" got out-coached.

Have you ever watched Bill Self? Coach K? Same **** happens.

Eh, I never singled Fred out as a bad coach, just that he has a ways to go. This has gotten from me criticizing 3 minutes of his coaching career, to me thinking he's a horrible coach. I get why he left DG to manage the ends of those 2 games, I just dont' agree with it and it you watch those games DG didn't look like a savy veteran PG. He looked lost, and Freddie should have settled him down. I'm not saying we would have won those games just that a TO would've been very helpful considering we only have 3 or 4 guys who've had any PT before this season, let guys comfortable in game deciding situations.