So what is the final assessment on this team?

[Cyclonepride]

I wondered all year what all these close victories and come from behind wins meant about how good this team really was. The postseason answered that decisively.

However, I still wonder what it was that about them that made it all play out that way.

Were they a group of hard nosed, competitive overachievers with a strong will to win?

An extremely talented group that sometimes lost focus but regained it when it mattered?

Or a talented group that was calm, cool and collected that turned it on when the game was on the line?

I personally lean toward the last one as it makes sense with what we know about Fred's style. I also think that worry about foul trouble led to less aggressive play initially to give us a chance to have our best guys available for the decisive minutes of the game.

Thoughts?

 

[timappelgate]

My assessment is that they were really good.

 

[tm3308]

I'd tend to go with option C, but I wouldn't argue strongly with someone who chooses B either. The Big Three was as good as any trio in the country this year. When you've got guys like Kane and Niang, that's good enough for most teams. Then you add the Big 12 POY to the mix? And arguably the country's best up and comers in the coaching ranks? No way could you call a group like that "overachieving".

 

[Cyclonepride]

My assessment is that they were really good.

Oh, I agree. Just curious why they had a tendency to get down big and close like mothers.

 

[CyArob]

My assessment is that they were really good.

Yep, I'd say this sums it up.

 

[jdoggivjc]

My assessment is that they were really good.

My assessment is we'll never know just how good they could have been, with the Niang injury and all.

 

[FDWxMan]

I was on option A for a long time this year.

I was never able to put my finger on it, but they just never felt as "dangerous" (best word I can think of that sort of fits) as last year.

I think it was the lack of somebody like McGee. Somebody that was a bit more consistent on the Red Hot at any moment scale.

Last year, McGee was a ticking time bomb, combined with all of the rest of the shooters where ISU could on any given night be so on-fire that no team in the country would be able to stop it. (Sort of like ISU flipped into the mode where the computer on Madden or NCAA Fb decides you're due to lose and will not let you win no matter what).

Now, Naz Long really came on at the end of the year and took over the role that pushed them more toward C than overacheivers, so I suppose C in the end...but for a long time I this year I thought there were overachieving a bit. (overacheiving is a bit harsh, but you get the idea).

Again, this is all just based on personal feel and not really any sort of super deep analysis, but clearly I think at the end of the year into the tournament they did take a step forward and became that team that was nails when it mattered.

 

[scyclonekid]

Like the brisket at woody's smoke shack........******* good.

 

[bigdaddykane]

this team really clicked in the final minutes of the game, we had so many come back wins.

 

[JohnnyFive]

Overachieving and underachieving at the same time. They had Final Four talent when healthy. They overachieved in the sense of pre-season media assessments. Look at the league predictions as a whole. I think that tells you all you need to know about pre-season media assessments.

 

[Beyerball]

I've been following ISU basketball for 35 years now and in that time I'd say this was a Top 3 team for me. It was the first team that I can ever remember that when we were down by 10+ points in any game I never worried..accept the last game . THat kind of team is a fun team to watch because you just know that you are going to be in every game with a great to chance to win it. I can't remember an ISU team like that. Favorite overall team is still the 1999-2000 team but this team was close. I think we are all going to really like next years team.

 

[Tre4ISU]

Just like last year. Great year, great guys, great fun, ****** ******* luck that leaves us wondering if we could have two consecutive national championships. Good grief that's uplifting and depressing **** all at once.

 

[Cyclonesince78]

I'll go option C. Awesome team. One weakness is they lacked killer instinct. Kept too many games close that had no business being that way.

 

[Erik4Cy]

My assessment is that they were really good.

 

[Doc]

I wondered all year what all these close victories and come from behind wins meant about how good this team really was. The postseason answered that decisively.

However, I still wonder what it was that about them that made it all play out that way.

Were they a group of hard nosed, competitive overachievers with a strong will to win?

An extremely talented group that sometimes lost focus but regained it when it mattered?

Or a talented group that was calm, cool and collected that turned it on when the game was on the line?

I personally lean toward the last one as it makes sense with what we know about Fred's style. I also think that worry about foul trouble led to less aggressive play initially to give us a chance to have our best guys available for the decisive minutes of the game.

Thoughts?

They were 3 Naz Long shots from...something. I think
they were overachievers. And I think that's the biggest compliment I can give to the team.

 

[GWad]

I wondered all year what all these close victories and come from behind wins meant about how good this team really was. The postseason answered that decisively.

However, I still wonder what it was that about them that made it all play out that way.

Were they a group of hard nosed, competitive overachievers with a strong will to win?

An extremely talented group that sometimes lost focus but regained it when it mattered?

Or a talented group that was calm, cool and collected that turned it on when the game was on the line?

I personally lean toward the last one as it makes sense with what we know about Fred's style. I also think that worry about foul trouble led to less aggressive play initially to give us a chance to have our best guys available for the decisive minutes of the game.

Thoughts?

They were "SWEET"

 

[Psiclone]

My assessment is we'll never know just how good they could have been, with the Niang injury and all.

Correct, similar to last year after Babb was hurt and didn't play in the second half. Each team, if healthy, had the potential to go to the final four.

 

[cykocy]

Onions!

 

[Cyclonepride]

Correct, similar to last year after Babb was hurt and didn't play in the second half. Each team, if healthy, had the potential to go to the final four.

I think you are right, I just hadn't stopped back to think of that yet. Great signs for the future!

 

[cuphues]

I've been following ISU basketball for 35 years now and in that time I'd say this was a Top 3 team for me. It was the first team that I can ever remember that when we were down by 10+ points in any game I never worried..accept the last game . THat kind of team is a fun team to watch because you just know that you are going to be in every game with a great to chance to win it. I can't remember an ISU team like that. Favorite overall team is still the 1999-2000 team but this team was close. I think we are all going to really like next years team.

Agreed. This is the 2nd ranked team for ISU since 1980 forward. Only the Tinsley/Fizer was better.