Missouri perspective-ISU BB

[t-noah]

Living in MO, I'd like to examine what MU is doing under Mike Anderson, vs. where ISU currently is at. First of all, MU is pretty good. We all know they have a fast tempo, press-type attack, like to run. Our style, right now, and probably will largely be under McD, is more of a deliberate, set offense, defense first, rebounding style. I would hope that when we get the horses, we too will be able to more up-tempo, pressure D, run, attack the basket. It's pretty obvious that we just don't have the skilled, quicker athletetes that can create, shoot, pass and rebound consistently, run a motion offense now and again. I'm thinking of a combination of fundamental set offense and defense, ala Don Haskins, Texas Western in "Glory Road", but when the light bulb came on and he let the players PLAY. The key with that National Championship team in '65-66 was that he had the players. We don't as yet.

We need a taller more athletic front line, players in the 6'-5" to 6-9 range who can pass, shoot and rebound, IMO! Let's look at MU: Starting 5 against ISU: D. Carrol 6-8, Sr., F; K. Ramsey 6-9, Jr., F; JT Tiller 6-3, Jr., G; Z. Taylor 6-4, Jr., G; K. English 6-6, Fr., G. Tall, athletic, fast, all can shoot, and rebound. Key resevere, in our game, Marcus Denmon 6-3 Fr., G., 16 pts. against us (anybody remember Martinez Denmon?). Other reserves: S. Moore 6-9, Fr., C.; J. Safford 6-8, So., F.; L. Bowers 6-8, Fr., F. I'm not even sure Matt Lawrence 6-7 Sr., G. even played. Lawrence is the kind of player I think McD might like, cause he can shoot 3's, but he didn't play against us. Living off the Trey won't work in the B12 if you can't play physical, have a mid-court game, and rebound. We have to have guards and forwards that can penetrate, dish, and shoot.

I think MU is good. I believe they are saying it's one of their best starts ever, or at least for awhile. We just couldn't keep up w/ them in the 2nd half. They've beaten Cal by 27 at home, USC on a neutral court by 9, and Georgia by 6 at Georgia. Only 3 losses, to Xavier by 4, Illinois, both a neutral court, and away at Nebraska by 5. Their other wins mostly by 20, 30, and 40 points.

So, I guess I'd like some discussion on where we are headed as a program. And I'd prefer it to be a positive (not negative) thread!
We need to support our kids and coaches! I really think DG is making good progress, and is taking it to the hole better. He just hasn't got the mid or long range game yet, consistently. CB has improved so much from last year, and I could tell this even from watching him (my only game so far this year) against Missouri. He just didn't have much help. And speaking of help, I really like the potential of Hamilton, and he was the leading scorer w/ 13 pts. Great game for him early in his career!

We have Gilstrap coming. He'll need to play huge for his only year w/ us. We are really counting on Colvin to come in and contribute some right away, and be a playmaker. Who else do we have coming in, signed? Kadima...Is he here next year? How will he and others fit in? We need more athletic swing guards and forwards, and need to recruit another tall power forward/center in the worst way, IMO. We are young, yes, but need an infusion of talent. The kid from Davenport sounds like he could really contribute on the boards, but lacks offense. We need good shooters/scorers. HB would be great, but maybe we shouldn't get our hopes too high. How is the recruiting trail for forwards/centers??

 

[cyclonepower02]

Too...many...words

Iowa State is headed in the right direction. If our recruits turn out to be what we hope we will be in good hands.

 

[Final42b]

Kadima is 2010. So far we have kadima and dykstra for 2010, and hopefuly HB, kelm/Ejim.

 

[cyclonepower02]

yeah jordan dykstra commited a long time ago, like back in '06

hopefully hes getting better (hes a 3 star right now), but i havent hear much about him.

 

[Final42b]

yeah jordan dykstra commited a long time ago, like back in '06

hopefully hes getting better (hes a 3 star right now), but i havent hear much about him.

Thats because his team mate Hemstra is doing better than him, numbers wise. But i think its because Gmac is making him focus on other components of his game.

 

[jay moe]

Mizzou was quicker than us in all aspects of the game yesterday. What surprised me the most was how well they shot the ball. I'm thinking this was an abnormal game for them, and am looking forward to the return game in Ames. I like where we are as a team, much better than a year ago, but I do agree that we need to be more athletic, especially at the wings. I think Staiger will be a much better player when we get a slasher, Gilstrap, to go with him.

 

[t-noah]

Mizzou was quicker than us in all aspects of the game yesterday. What surprised me the most was how well they shot the ball. I'm thinking this was an abnormal game for them, and am looking forward to the return game in Ames. I like where we are as a team, much better than a year ago, but I do agree that we need to be more athletic, especially at the wings. I think Staiger will be a much better player when we get a slasher, Gilstrap, to go with him.

Yes, they shot well, 45% from the field, 52% from 3 point.

So what we have coming next year is Colvin, Gilstrap (and Christopherson, Pomlee), anyone else? For '10 we have Dykstra, and Kadima, still looking to sign maybe Kelm, you know who, or other? Anyone else? I know we are tight with scholarships, yada, yada.

Cyismydog, or others, who are we looking at again that I haven't mentioned, in the tall swing/forward or forward/center positions, for '09, '10, and maybe even '11 class? This is where we really need help. I realize we may not have any more 'ships to give in '09, '10, unless some transfers/turnover. Is that about right? I could use a refresher on who we may be going after.

 

[Final42b]

Yes, they shot well, 45% from the field, 52% from 3 point.

So what we have coming next year is Colvin, Gilstrap (and Christopherson, Pomlee), anyone else? For '10 we have Dykstra, and Kadima, still looking to sign maybe Kelm, you know who, or other? Anyone else? I know we are tight with scholarships, yada, yada.

Cyismydog, or others, who are we looking at again that I haven't mentioned, in the tall swing/forward or forward/center positions, for '09, '10, and maybe even '11 class? This is where we really need help. I realize we may not have any more 'ships to give in '09, '10, unless some transfers/turnover. Is that about right? I could use a refresher on who we may be going after.

Dont forget about melvin ejim, and it looks like we are recruiting a 6'8 guy named Kadem Green,but i doubt we get him if we get Kelm. For 2011 we are in pursuit of darnell harris, an athletic 6'7 SF

 

[StLouisClone]

Yes, they shot well, 45% from the field, 52% from 3 point.

So what we have coming next year is Colvin, Gilstrap (and Christopherson, Pomlee), anyone else? For '10 we have Dykstra, and Kadima, still looking to sign maybe Kelm, you know who, or other? Anyone else? I know we are tight with scholarships, yada, yada.

Cyismydog, or others, who are we looking at again that I haven't mentioned, in the tall swing/forward or forward/center positions, for '09, '10, and maybe even '11 class? This is where we really need help. I realize we may not have any more 'ships to give in '09, '10, unless some transfers/turnover. Is that about right? I could use a refresher on who we may be going after.

That's the biggest problem I have with McD is his use of scholarships. We've got too many freshmen and sophomores sitting on the bench who aren't showing a lot of promise. Hamilton seems to be the only pleasant surprise out of the SEVEN (7) players that we signed last year. Some of the other guys may make good role players by the time they are juniors, but we didn't need 6 more role players!!

I do think that Vanderbeken has some upside and is currently being underutilized. I'm hoping that's because he is just now getting over a sore ankle. I'd like to see Vanderbeken become our permanent 6th man off the bench.

 

[intrepid27]

If Mizzou continues to play the was they did against us they will beat a lot of teams. We got off to a slow start and when they got shot lights out. Bad combination when you are playing on the road.

 

[kg-cyclone]

If Mizzou continues to play the was they did against us they will beat a lot of teams. We got off to a slow start and when they got shot lights out. Bad combination when you are playing on the road.

Good Post...IMO, Missouri is the best team in the North. We handled the back court pressure pretty well, but turned it over too much when we tried to get into our offense. It was in the game plan to let a couple guys shoot (To their credit they knocked down the open looks). They took Lucca away and double teamed Brackins. DG did a nice job of getting to the rim, but he needs to finish. Eikmeyer practiced well, but was terrible during the game. We need DG, Lucca, and Brackins to get us 40-50 points...didn't happen and we went from playing our game to Missouri's game.

 

[t-noah]

That's the biggest problem I have with McD is his use of scholarships. We've got too many freshmen and sophomores sitting on the bench who aren't showing a lot of promise. Hamilton seems to be the only pleasant surprise out of the SEVEN (7) players that we signed last year. Some of the other guys may make good role players by the time they are juniors, but we didn't need 6 more role players!!

Yeah, not to knock the current group of fresh and soph, excluding the starters. After all they are just freshmen and sophomores, and may yet develope into what we need. I can't help but remember some of the recruiting misses McD had in his first 2-3 classes. We need 2 players that can play big out of each recruiting class. The junior and senior class is just depleted, and we all know some of the reasons. Our coach may ultimately have to answer to the number and type of freshman and sophs he's brought in the last 2 years. Would it have been better to hold a scholarship or two open, who knows? It was quite a mess. Now it seems like the recruiting is on the upswing, but we do need to land a couple of more studs in the next 2-3 classes, to really start the recovery. I'm hopeful and believe that McD will get it rolling, but it will take more time in this case. Good times will return. Patience will have to largely subside for now.

 

[CyclonesRule]

I think we will get there we just need a few more players.

 

[ppclone]

This is actually a good discussion topic. I get the original post's point, but disagree that we would compare the teams. This is b/c the systems/approaches to style of basketball are so different. Mizzou has a very entertaining brand and you can't argue with the results (as highlighted in the original post). Mac's style is, well, polar opposite...and this ISN'T a bad thing. But comparing the 2 programs is like comparing a super-spread with a pro-style football offense. Different, neither measurable vs. the other.

I think we're developing very well. Throw away timelines and i really like this team and where its headed. Given all of the turnover (and i'm not against it - though a little chapped about the Wesley defection), i think they're gellin' like Magellen, with a strong future in Craig, Diante and Lucca.

I think we win 4-5 more games this year. Next year is the real measuring stick. CB, DG and LS should hit their stride as Juniors, strong experience with Hamilton (watch out) and (it looks like) strong incomers (Gilstrap, Colvin...not having to support the load Craig did as a true Frosh). Not to mention additional support players from this year (like Jamie).

Sorry for the long post. I'm really liking this team and don't want to compare too much against teams w/different systems.

Loyal Sons Forever True!

 

[IOWASTATE]

Ha I was at the game, and afterward this old missouri fan asked me, "did you guys play nebraska?" my buddies response was "yea we beat them". Needless to say he sulked away to his car haha

 

[LeSchmick]

I don't have time to read that novel and you probably have more important things to do than to write it.

 

[cyclonenum1]

Hamilton seems to be the only pleasant surprise out of the SEVEN (7) players that we signed last year. Some of the other guys may make good role players by the time they are juniors, but we didn't need 6 more role players!!

This is a great point you make...we certainly need more "impact" players. Missouri simply has a more athletic team than we do (as will most Big 12 foes).

 

[cyclonenum1]

If Mizzou continues to play the was they did against us they will beat a lot of teams. We got off to a slow start and when they got shot lights out. Bad combination when you are playing on the road.

This "logic" always makes me laugh. I wonder how many times this year we will be talking about the other team having a great (better than they typically have) game against us? My guess is that it will happen again and the common denominator will be that they were playing us. My son's HS team is 23-1 and we played in a tournament recently. In back to back games we played a tougher team and we struggled (but won) and then we played a weaker team and blew their doors off. One of the moms made the comment after the second game (the blowout) that she wished we would have shot the ball against the first team (the closer game) like we did in the second game. I told her that how we shot the ball had something to do with how tough the defense was that our opponent was playing against us.

 

[cyclonenum1]

IMO, Missouri is the best team in the North.


Eikmeyer practiced well, but was terrible during the game.

The Big 12 North is rather weak. My money is still on KU.

Do you think Eikmeier's performance has anything to do with the fact that he was playing against a team with far superior athleticism than he brings to the table?

 

[ISUFan22]

Everyone always has some sort of "perspective" after a bad loss.

Look, we got beat soundly. Period. No spinning it, no sugarcoating it. They stomped us. While the score was closer at half, it was obvious we were never really in the game.