Makale Foreman Grad Transfer
- Thread starter CyTwins
- Start date
For people disagreeing with this, go look at his numbers. He had a huge assist rate with a large turnover rate. He was a very poor shooter all around and was, at best, and average rebounder. You will not see a progression like Kane's often and I don't have the time but I'd love to see if there is anyone else who has had such improvement when moving to a P5 conference. His Ortg improved 16 points. His Dreb doubled. His 3P shooting improved by 15 points on not many less attempts. His turnover rate dropped by a third. He drew more fouls and shot 12% better at the line. his eFG% and TS% went up 9 and 10 points.
He's the exception. If he were recruited this year, we'd love his size and that assist rate but you wouldn't call it a home run. You would never expect anything close to that all-around improvement. No one expected him to be a first team all big 12 player and POY candidate.
I understand that but I was just trying to illustrate a point that we already had (and let go) a similar player on our roster last season.
Who is getting excited? He might be able to fill a need for depth and help us out a bit. That's enough.
Good shooters don't shoot 82-240 (34.2%) from the field in conference play in the America East Conference. He is high volume but I wouldn't confuse that with being a good shooter as shot selection has to be part of that equation. As an example Prentiss Nixon was 64-189 (33.9%) his junior year in conference play in the Mountain West. Mountain West was the 8th best conference in 2018 while the America East was 25th in 2020 according to Kenpom.
True, but I do think it’s important to point out that when Foreman shot 34.2%, the 3-point line was further back than when Nixon shot 33.9%. This is material since a significant percentage of Foreman’s shots come from behind the line.
I tend to agree. At worst Foreman is a 3 pt shooting specialist off the bench. I would be curious how the staff views Foreman's game vs. Tre Jackson.
The one concern I have about Foreman is ISU would be his 3rd school. As a staff I would want to make sure Foreman is a solid guy in the locker room and a good teammate.
I don't think he would get the same shot volume at ISU vs. Stoneybrook. So I think he will need to be content to be a co-alpha with Young, Bolton and Johnson.
He also was nothing short of abysmal for over half of their conference season. If we agree that culture is an issue then the freshmen need to create that culture along with Young and Conditt. We do not need a high volume/low efficiency 5th year senior creating the culture in my opinion. (Now sure how that guy is happy with 10-15 minutes a game and how he will be efficient in that role) A 5th year senior that is on his 3rd school and transferring from a low major to a Power 5. People tend to forget there is a major difference even between the Mountain West, C-USA and the Sun Belt compared to the America East or Northeast Conference.
Between his junior and senior years --
-- ORTG went from 93.6 (which is kind of gross) to 110.4 (which is really nice)
-- what changed...? not his usage (Kane was always a 27% guy), but rather a much higher TS%, which came from a combination of somehow going from a 25% 3PT shooter to a 40% 3PT shooter and drawing many more free throws
-- still pretty bad at the line, but he had way more chances as a senior
-- got way better on the defensive boards, somehow, too
-- had fewer assist but fewer turnovers as a senior, as well
The senior version of Kane and the junior version of Kane are categorically different players. Imagine if we had Nixon back for another year but, instead of clanking jump shots all day (and little else), he attacked the rim and finished/drew fouls and canned 40% of his threes while threatening double-doubles on the boards every night.
It was that large of transformation of a "meh" C-USA PG into an All-American.
Foreman's stats are confounding.
To say he is not a good shooter is misleading. He shot 36% from 3 and took 8.5 shots from beyond the arc. A guy taking such a high volume of 3's isn't being overly selective to take high quality shots.
Foreman also shot 85% from the free-throw line. Another sign he's got a good stroke.
The confusing part is he shot 37% on 2pt shots. As a guard one would hope he could shoot around 45% from 2.
I would be curious if his poor 2 point shooting is missed jump shots or out-of-control drives.
I know, could have articulated that better. His size and strength allowed him to compete in the Big 12 where he physically dominated most of his competitors. He could have done the same thing in Huntington but his upside was pretty big. He also was surrounded by some two of the most talented kids to ever wear an Iowa State jersey.
If we take Foreman then we take him. I’m concerned about how that impacts JCL’s decision who is the better of two prospects. I also think there is an inherent risk (chemistry wise) when you bring in a high volume 5th year guy who is used to putting up 14 shots a game.
I agree with you that DeAndre was one of the most physically dominant guards I have ever seen in an Iowa State uniform. But all those advantages he had over high level B12 players, including a ton of guys who would end up in the NBA, should have been even more obvious playing in C-USA. He should have had even more advantages with size, strength, and quickness there at that level than he did in the B12.
The advantages you describe are ones that should increase as you *drop* levels of competition, not once you increase to the best conference in the country. You are right that DeAndre had better teammates in Ames, but he had better opponents, too. I do not know how having Melvin Ejim and Dustin Hogue there to crash the offensive boards for garbage points helped him go from 25% to 40% as a three-point shooter between seasons, however, which was by far the largest transformation in his game.
As to your last point, I generally agree. I have called JCL a "must-get" on here once or twice and I still think that. I honestly wonder why he has not committed yet, and want to hope to expect it soon given that Michigan does not really seem like a viable option anymore when them loading up so much in the backcourt. I am super "meh" on Foreman -- as a few others have noted on here, he is an archetypal mid-major chucker who scored a lot with high usage but low efficiency on a bad team. We knew a guy like that last year named Nixon, though Foreman is at least a slightly better version of that. We probably could have had any of a dozen of those guys by now, so maybe this is just the one we finally take as the third scholarship -- with that second one going to Coleman-Lands.
I would definitely slow-play Foreman if we still have any shot at JCL and if taking Foreman would somehow upset our chances with him. I trust a guy coming out of the Big East to move the needle way more than I trust somebody to come out of America East playing powerhouses like SUNY-Albany, UMBC, UVT, and UMass-Lowell instead of scrub programs like Villanova, Creighton, Xavier, and Marquette.
Last edited:
I don’t understand how people think getting Forman has any effect on JCL. JCL would start here...
I have a feeling that most guards who have a below 40% FG% from 2 pts are the kind of guards that take a lot of jump shots from a step or so inside the 3 pt line.
Freddy thought this was the stupidest shot in basketball and I tend to agree.
