The last two pages are exactly my point in all of the debate between the two. People are talking past each other. Some can’t accept that there are valid criticisms of Prohm. Right now I’m not really seeing anyone being overly critical of Prohm. It seems a lot of calling for recognizing the reality of his first two year. He could have easily destroyers those teams but he also could have done a better job with those teams. We can debate those differences without calling each other idiots.
Just what was the reality of the first two prohm teams? I’m curious as to your perspective.
And the Jessie guy is an idiot, so truth wins out
@Urbandale2013 I think we are pretty similar in our thinking of Prohm's performance thus far, but I do think many people really overestimate the potential of those 2016 and 2017 ISU teams.
Those teams had amazing shooting and some really fun offense, but defensively there were some major liabilities and potential to create mismatches by the opposing team. Also when you play so many
awesome guards you most often sacrifice dearly in offensive and defensive rebounding. Prohm may have underachieved in 2018, but I think given the roster construction there is a compelling argument that he overachieved in 2016 and 2017. For example when you compare preseason to final Sagarin, KPI, and KenPom ratings, ISU maintained or exceeded expectations in those first 2 years.
Perhaps Prohm's best attribute is being able to make some difficult decisions early know that it will be worth it when it really matters at the end of the year. It is still TBD, but the early season suspensions might be another example of that.
p.s. The criticisms I have of Prohm are some of the transfer misses, seeming ineffectiveness of BLOB/SLOB plays, and slowness to make roster decisions. Starting tonight, how Prohm incorporates 4 players and manages the chemistry and minutes of a team that has been humming will be really fascinating. It might be his most difficult and telling test yet.