How did Iowa State play poorly against Iowa?

[clonedude]

It was mostly defensively where I thought ISU looked bad. Their transition defense was terrible. I hadn't seen them get back that poorly before, but maybe Iowa was just that fast at getting the ball up the court.

And ISU gave up a lot of easy baskets I thought, but I think they were really trying to stay out of foul trouble most of the night.

The other thing that stood out to me was that I'd say most of the Hawkeye players had good games Friday night. Marble did. White definitely did. Gesell was good. Uthoff was good. Woodbury actually played well for him. Olaseni and Basabe were ok. McCabe had a bad night.

As for ISU, Niang and Hogue had good games, but outside of that, nobody else really did IMO. Matt Thomas was off all night. Ejim wasn't very good most of the night. Kane was off all night. Long was pretty good, not at his best though. Morris did ok, nothing great though either.

So overall, I thought Iowa played a lot more up to their ceiling than ISU did. Of course, Iowa had something to do with that, and that is where you saw the FT disparity come into play. Iowa played MUCH more physical defense, never gave up anything to the basket and contested everything. It put ISU on the FT line quite a bit, but it also took them out of any kind of rhythm they were hoping to get into as well.

 

[MNclone]

It was mostly defensively where I thought ISU looked bad. Their transition defense was terrible. I hadn't seen them get back that poorly before, but maybe Iowa was just that fast at getting the ball up the court.

And ISU gave up a lot of easy baskets I thought, but I think they were really trying to stay out of foul trouble most of the night.

The other thing that stood out to me was that I'd say most of the Hawkeye players had good games Friday night. Marble did. White definitely did. Gesell was good. Uthoff was good. Woodbury actually played well for him. Olaseni and Basabe were ok. McCabe had a bad night.

As for ISU, Niang and Hogue had good games, but outside of that, nobody else really did IMO. Matt Thomas was off all night. Ejim wasn't very good most of the night. Kane was off all night. Long was pretty good, not at his best though. Morris did ok, nothing great though either.

So overall, I thought Iowa played a lot more up to their ceiling than ISU did. Of course, Iowa had something to do with that, and that is where you saw the FT disparity come into play. Iowa played MUCH more physical defense, never gave up anything to the basket and contested everything. It put ISU on the FT line quite a bit, but it also took them out of any kind of rhythm they were hoping to get into as well.

ISU looked bad on D because they gave up a lot of dunks. Fortunately dunks are still only worth 2 pts.
Iowa also gets out on the break very quickly. The only way to slow it was to send 4 back right after each shot.

 

[Amesboy]

ISU never got in a rhythm offensively and struggled gettimomentumng big stops which prevented a great run that could get the crowd into the game

Absolutely. You can't always gauge a game on stats.You have to look at rhythm, runs, momentum. It was obvious the Cyclones were struggling the first half and allot of the second half with these issues yet were able to rise up and finish like seasoned veterans. Yes Marble and White played well. Stop making excuses for choking and not finishing.

 

[JohnnyFive]

I see a lot of posters say that Iowa State played like **** against Iowa yet still won. However, I don't really understand where this is coming from. They shot right near their season average (48% FG, 35% 3PT, 64% FT against Iowa; 49% FG, 37% 3PT, 68% FT for the season) in every category and only turned it over 10 times. This is the third Iowa State game I have watched this season (Mich, BYU) and they played just as well, if not better, than they played in those games.

Is it because Iowa State struggled getting back in transition defense and gave Iowa a lot of easy baskets, so the perception is that Iowa State didn't play well? Or do Iowa State fans just refuse to acknowledge that Iowa's collection of gingers and inferior athletes was able to hang with Fred's bunch? I guess I really just don't understand that line of thinking and would like some perspective from Iowa State fans.

Derpth. You guys have a lot of derpth.

 

[Linusvanp3lt]

I see a lot of posters say that Iowa State played like **** against Iowa yet still won. However, I don't really understand where this is coming from. They shot right near their season average (48% FG, 35% 3PT, 64% FT against Iowa; 49% FG, 37% 3PT, 68% FT for the season) in every category and only turned it over 10 times. This is the third Iowa State game I have watched this season (Mich, BYU) and they played just as well, if not better, than they played in those games.

Is it because Iowa State struggled getting back in transition defense and gave Iowa a lot of easy baskets, so the perception is that Iowa State didn't play well? Or do Iowa State fans just refuse to acknowledge that Iowa's collection of gingers and inferior athletes was able to hang with Fred's bunch? I guess I really just don't understand that line of thinking and would like some perspective from Iowa State fans.

I agree. ISU struggled with depth and transition game of Iowa. Also missed some shots around the rim, especially by Kane that I believe were due to seeing far more length from Iowa as compared to most other opponents. But this isn't a play badly thing, this is a matchup thing. Iowa matches up well with ISU and is able to exploit some of their poor defensive habits, as well as challenge more of their shots. Beyond that ISU played more dumb then bad. Getting back on defense doesn't take luck, it takes commitment to do so.

ISU won a game it probably shouldn't have, but hey, I don't remember KU giving us the games we should have won last year.

 

[Doc]

It was mostly defensively where I thought ISU looked bad. Their transition defense was terrible. I hadn't seen them get back that poorly before, but maybe Iowa was just that fast at getting the ball up the court.

And ISU gave up a lot of easy baskets I thought, but I think they were really trying to stay out of foul trouble most of the night.

The other thing that stood out to me was that I'd say most of the Hawkeye players had good games Friday night. Marble did. White definitely did. Gesell was good. Uthoff was good. Woodbury actually played well for him. Olaseni and Basabe were ok. McCabe had a bad night.

As for ISU, Niang and Hogue had good games, but outside of that, nobody else really did IMO. Matt Thomas was off all night. Ejim wasn't very good most of the night. Kane was off all night. Long was pretty good, not at his best though. Morris did ok, nothing great though either.

So overall, I thought Iowa played a lot more up to their ceiling than ISU did. Of course, Iowa had something to do with that, and that is where you saw the FT disparity come into play. Iowa played MUCH more physical defense, never gave up anything to the basket and contested everything. It put ISU on the FT line quite a bit, but it also took them out of any kind of rhythm they were hoping to get into as well.

They gave up quite a few buckets last year when they didn't get down the court fast enough too. It was probably my main ***** last year. Iowa goes for it more than most teams too -- it doesn't really surprise me it was a problem.

 

[LegendofRodA]

Absolutely. You can't always gauge a game on stats.You have to look at rhythm, runs, momentum. It was obvious the Cyclones were struggling the first half and allot of the second half with these issues yet were able to rise up and finish like seasoned veterans. Yes Marble and White played well. Stop making excuses for choking and not finishing.

2 things I would use to describe the Iowa men's bball team.

 

[clone96cr]

...dominated on the boards.

 

[CYEATHAWK]

I would disagree. Iowa has shown they are capable of shooting much better than they did from the perimeter and also shot very poorly from the FT line. IMO Iowa played a B+ game and Iowa State played a solid B/B+. Iowa State won, so the point is moot, so the point is moot, but the idea that Iowa State has a far superior team is pretty baseless.

Yes and no. But you don't need to be far superior to be better. I would rather win every game by 3 and tell the opponent how good they are, than lose by 3 and tell them we were better.

 

[Wesley]

If you have found a way to score more points than the other team, then you've played pretty well.

I would say that ISU did not have the spacing and ball movement that they have had most of the year, but a lot of credit must go to Iowa for mixing up defenses. When ISU made one extra pass, things went pretty well.

My gripe was rebounding.

 

[Wesley]

Derpth. You guys have a lot of derpth.

Deep. They are really deep. And tall. Very tall. Deep and tall.

 

[AuH2O]

ISU's transition D was putrid most of the game, especially in the first half. Rebounding wasn't good, but these things probably have a lot to do with Iowa. So, overall, I think ISU played well, but I tend to heavily weigh how a team makes plays when the game is on the line. For that same reason I think ISU was and is the better team. I've seen even terrible teams do what Iowa has basically done most of last year, as well as vs. ISU and Villanova - play with or better than a good team only to fail to close it out. If playing better for a majority of the game but losing in the end in a tough game means the "better team lost," than our 08-09 15-17 team was better than Kansas.

 

[Gunnerclone]

It was mostly defensively where I thought ISU looked bad. Their transition defense was terrible. I hadn't seen them get back that poorly before, but maybe Iowa was just that fast at getting the ball up the court.

And ISU gave up a lot of easy baskets I thought, but I think they were really trying to stay out of foul trouble most of the night.

The other thing that stood out to me was that I'd say most of the Hawkeye players had good games Friday night. Marble did. White definitely did. Gesell was good. Uthoff was good. Woodbury actually played well for him. Olaseni and Basabe were ok. McCabe had a bad night.

As for ISU, Niang and Hogue had good games, but outside of that, nobody else really did IMO. Matt Thomas was off all night. Ejim wasn't very good most of the night. Kane was off all night. Long was pretty good, not at his best though. Morris did ok, nothing great though either.

So overall, I thought Iowa played a lot more up to their ceiling than ISU did. Of course, Iowa had something to do with that, and that is where you saw the FT disparity come into play. Iowa played MUCH more physical defense, never gave up anything to the basket and contested everything. It put ISU on the FT line quite a bit, but it also took them out of any kind of rhythm they were hoping to get into as well.

Ejim had 22 and 7, shot over 50% from the field and was 5-7 from the line. He also managed to stay completely out of foul trouble. That's just ******* solid.

 

[mustangcy]

ISU started the game 1-9 from three point. ISU was down 7 at half and won by 3 so they scored 10 more points than Iowa in the 2nd half...so basically once ISU started shoot closer to it's average's it beat Iowa by 10 in one half. That's a pretty sizable half lead. Iowa's lead they jumped out to while ISU was ice cold was the difference in seeming like Iowa was the better team when in reality they were not.

 

[bradnjen]

I thought Iowa played really aggressive and physical. We played like we wanted to avoid foul trouble. We were able to play better at the end because no one was in foul trouble.

On another note, this business of Iowa wins the game at CHA or a neutral site, keep in mind Fred's teams play well on the road too. See last year KU, OSU, and Baylor. Could have won all three.

 

[Bret44]

I suppose I better answer the OPs question: ISU played down to their competition, as simple as that.

 

[mikem]

Jesus, not complicated. I think Iowa is good.

Iowa State came out a bit too impressed with the situation, and they were a bit flat. Give Iowa credit they took advantage.

You saw in the second half Iowa State matched Iowa's effort and win the half by 10.

That is what people see when they say that.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

I don't think Gesell is a pure ginger, he's a day walker.

 

[everyyard]

I thought Iowa played really aggressive and physical. We played like we wanted to avoid foul trouble. We were able to play better at the end because no one was in foul trouble.

On another note, this business of Iowa wins the game at CHA or a neutral site, keep in mind Fred's teams play well on the road too. See last year KU, OSU, and Baylor. Could have won all three.

I think we win this game anywhere. Including Carver, which is basically a neutral site depending on how much free pizza is on hand.

 

[CascadeClone]

This was not ISUs best performance of the season. Kane was bad on offense and defense and he is a critical piece- maybe his worst game of the year. Melvin was bad on defense which was unusual. Those are 2 of the 3 most important guys for ISU so them having a bad night is a problem.

Part of this is on Iowa, both their style of play and how hard they played. I think Iowa's style of slap and grind and race in transition posed real challenges for ISU. And Iowa played hard esp on defense.

But as said earlier, Iowa had some guys have bad games esp on offense. Olesani and Basabe were kind of invisible. Jok should not be getting playing time from what I could see. And McCabe, jeez. 0-7 and 4 fouls. Why did Fran put the game in his hands when he was clearly having a terrible night? Dumb move IMHO but maybe he just didn't trust anyone else to take that shot (Marble?).

Net-net I thought Iowa played pretty well for being on the road, though obviously not a perfect game. ISU played average for being at home. If ISU would have played that level of ball in CHA it might have been more expected. But I think Iowa would have performed better at home and won.

In terms of how good both teams are, I think in a 10 game home and home, it's 5-5. 10 games at neutral site ISU wins 6-4. Call me a homer.

I would worry about on-court leadership if I was an Iowa fan. Who takes over when the game is on the line? Marble could do it but seems to avoid that kind of pressure (from my limited knowledge). Giselle should be but doesn't seem confident enough yet as a soph. The others are all kind of supporting role kind of guys - valuable and effective but can't put the team on their shoulders. So that is something that I think will cost them some games over the season.
ISU has both Niang and Kane with the big shoulders. That has already won them probably 3 close games already.


One other thing I noticed was at end of game all the Iowa bench had their arms interlocked like teams all do now. But Jok didn't. So there were guys with arms locked on either side of him but he bowed out. Did not look like good team chemistry from a freshman especially.