Is Next Year’s Team Honestly Going To Be Any Good?

  • After Iowa State won the Big 12, a Cyclone made a wonderful offer to We Will that now increases our match. Now all gifts up to $400,000 between now and the Final 4 will be matched. Please consider giving at We Will Collective.
    This notice can be dismissed using the upper right corner X button.

FinalFourCy

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2017
9,357
9,145
113
39
Again? You living in 2001?

In today's college basketball, with the way fouls are called to help ther offense, there's no such thing as really good defenses.

There's teams that slow down the game, and don't allow high point totals, and there's ultra athletic teams, with length, that are able to get stops when they need to. Hopefully Iowa St can be close to the latter.
Are you drunk?
 

madguy30

Well-Known Member
Nov 15, 2011
49,858
46,605
113
I agree that depth is an issue. Depth doesn’t seem to be any better next season. Relying on freshman for depth is risky business unless you can bring in recruits like Duke and Kentucky. I also don’t feel like I’m overreacting, but you’re entitled to your opinion.

Like Matt Thomas, Monte Morris and Naz Long (sophomore) kind of risky business?

Sign me up.
 

cyclonedave25

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jul 10, 2007
21,220
10,616
113
Chicago, IL
Weight is overrated. If Halliburton can create or simply handle the ball, he’ll play, and potentially a lot with our current roster.
If Conditt can come from the weak side and block shot, run the floor, and hit outside shots he’ll play.
Its overrated if you have an extremely good skill to offset the physical play of high level basketball. (ie: Monte Morris and his passing.)

Yeah, if they can do those things you just mentioned, they will play. But, if they were obviously ready to step in and do those things in the Big 12 as freshman, they would probably be rated higher. So, right now I'm assuming neither will come in and be key players their first year. They may need a year or two to develop their game and physically mature. But, back to my original point, we will have more depth next year.
 

WastedTalent

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2012
7,070
4,123
113
39
Are you drunk?
Working on it. Haha.

Defense doesn't win championships like it did 15 years ago. Give me five athletic guys, with length, and I'll take my chances on them playing just good enough defense.

Do you think Chris Beard is some defensive genius? He has athletes with length, and slows the game down. I will say, he does a good job of getting them to play team defense, but I'm thinking Prohm can too once guys like Wigginton and Lard have more experience.
 

cyclonefan1983

Well-Known Member
Feb 12, 2009
1,758
173
48
40
This year feels like 1998/ 1999 season, talented players on the team but missing an X Factor which came the year after and just like the 1999/ 2000, I fully expect Iowa State to be great if the Freshman and Shayok are the real deal!!!
 

FinalFourCy

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2017
9,357
9,145
113
39
Its overrated if you have an extremely good skill to offset the physical play of high level basketball. (ie: Monte Morris and his passing.)

Yeah, if they can do those things you just mentioned, they will play. But, if they were obviously ready to step in and do those things in the Big 12 as freshman, they would probably be rated higher. So, right now I'm assuming neither will come in and be key players their first year. They may need a year or two to develop their game and physically mature. But, back to my original point, we will have more depth next year.
Where were Smith and Culver rated? Or Bane last year for TCU? Rankings may be more overrated than weight.

They’re more than big enough and ranked high enough to think they’ll have a good chance to fill a role.
 

FinalFourCy

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2017
9,357
9,145
113
39
Working on it. Haha.

Defense doesn't win championships like it did 15 years ago. Give me five athletic guys, with length, and I'll take my chances on them playing just good enough defense.

Do you think Chris Beard is some defensive genius? He has athletes with length, and slows the game down. I will say, he does a good job of getting them to play team defense, but I'm thinking Prohm can too once guys like Wigginton and Lard have more experience.
Your response to whether will be good again on defense is that it isn’t 2001 is nonsensical.

Sorry, but we’re not ranked on defense the lowest in 15 years because it’s 2018 rather than 2001. We’re ranked there because our play relative to other teams is poor. How many Final Four teams have poor defenses that year? Not many, and that’s the same now as it ever has been.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rholtgraves

cyclonedave25

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jul 10, 2007
21,220
10,616
113
Chicago, IL
Where were Smith and Culver rated? Or Bane last year for TCU? Rankings may be more overrated than weight.

They’re more than big enough and ranked high enough to think they’ll have a good chance to fill a role.
Don't know what they were rated, but Smith and Culver are both 6'5" 190+ lbs.
Bane is 6'5" 215 lbs.
Haliburton is 6'2" 160 lbs.
One of those is not like the others...
Like I said, weight is overrated if you have a great skill to offset the physical play of high level basketball. If not, then they may need a year or two to develop their game and physically mature. If he comes in and can get to the rim and shoot like Wigginton, then he'll play. But right now, Im assuming he can't. It's not a big deal, we have depth next year. Our freshman coming in aren't always going to be fighting for a starting spot. We aren't Kentucky or Duke.
 

FinalFourCy

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2017
9,357
9,145
113
39
Right...point being that MM, MT, and Long were part of the 'depth' of the 13-14 team and were certainly relied on and things turned out alright.
He said it’s risky to rely on freshman for depth. He’s right.
Naz wasn’t a freshman. Thomas was, but again, it needed having one of the greatest trios in our history to do so. That doesn’t exactly refute risk.
 

IASTATE07

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
May 30, 2016
11,975
18,759
113
Don't know what they were rated, but Smith and Culver are both 6'5" 190+ lbs.
Bane is 6'5" 215 lbs.
Haliburton is 6'2" 160 lbs.
One of those is not like the others...
Like I said, weight is overrated if you have a great skill to offset the physical play of high level basketball. If not, then they may need a year or two to develop their game and physically mature. If he comes in and can get to the rim and shoot like Wigginton, then he'll play. But right now, Im assuming he can't. It's not a big deal, we have depth next year. Our freshman coming in aren't always going to be fighting for a starting spot. We aren't Kentucky or Duke.

Haliburton isn't 6'2".
 

cyclonedave25

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jul 10, 2007
21,220
10,616
113
Chicago, IL
Haliburton isn't 6'2".
Sorry, 6'5" 170. For some reason, when you do a google search and just read the info without clicking on his 247 profile it says 6'2" 160 lbs. But, when you actually click on his profile is says 6'5" 170. Weird.
 

FinalFourCy

Well-Known Member
Mar 5, 2017
9,357
9,145
113
39
Don't know what they were rated, but Smith and Culver are both 6'5" 190+ lbs.
Bane is 6'5" 215 lbs.
Haliburton is 6'2" 160 lbs.
One of those is not like the others...
Like I said, weight is overrated if you have a great skill to offset the physical play of high level basketball. If not, then they may need a year or two to develop their game and physically mature. If he comes in and can get to the rim and shoot like Wigginton, then he'll play. But right now, Im assuming he can't. It's not a big deal, we have depth next year. Our freshman coming in aren't always going to be fighting for a starting spot. We aren't Kentucky or Duke.
Haliburton is 6’5”.

At those physical attributes why do you think they were rated lower than Haliburton? Is it Haliburton’s skill perhaps?

We’re not talking about starting, we’re talking about contributing. We have one primary ball handler. If Haliburton can handle the ball his weight won’t preclude him from playing.
 

cyclonedave25

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Jul 10, 2007
21,220
10,616
113
Chicago, IL
Haliburton is 6’5”.

At those physical attributes why do you think they were rated lower than Haliburton? Is it Haliburton’s skill perhaps?

We’re not talking about starting, we’re talking about contributing. We have one primary ball handler. If Haliburton can handle the ball his weight won’t preclude him from playing.
I thought you said rating were more overrated than weight... :rolleyes: kidding, relax.

Here's why I don't think Haliburton will play very much next year: Because Babb will be our primary ball handler and when he needs a spell, then Wigginton will take over the PG.
Until he proves otherwise, I just don't see him taking any meaningful minutes from any of our other players. I could see him getting minutes similar to what Lewis is getting, but that's about it.
 

WastedTalent

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2012
7,070
4,123
113
39
Your response to whether will be good again on defense is that it isn’t 2001 is nonsensical.

Sorry, but we’re not ranked on defense the lowest in 15 years because it’s 2018 rather than 2001. We’re ranked there because our play relative to other teams is poor. How many Final Four teams have poor defenses that year? Not many, and that’s the same now as it ever has been.
Now you sound drunk... or maybe I'm there.

We're ranked poor on defense this year, compared to 2001 or basically any year, because the players are insanely inexperienced. You know these stats, but I'll point them out. Solo, only returning player with any starts... and he had like 12. Two best players are freshmen, one of which hadn't played a real game in two years. The other two starters were role players last season.

Hopefully more time together, and learning from experience, gets them to a point where they can be respectable.
 

WastedTalent

Well-Known Member
Oct 22, 2012
7,070
4,123
113
39
Your response to whether will be good again on defense is that it isn’t 2001 is nonsensical.

Sorry, but we’re not ranked on defense the lowest in 15 years because it’s 2018 rather than 2001. We’re ranked there because our play relative to other teams is poor. How many Final Four teams have poor defenses that year? Not many, and that’s the same now as it ever has been.
Also, I'm not expecting a final four season next year, so Iowa St doesn't need a "final four" defense. Give me something that finishes top half of the league.

Maybe few years down the road when the freshmen now are seniors, and next years class are juniors, then they'll be good enough on defense for a final four run.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kistek