Twister Sister Summary - Let the Dance Begin

[acoustimac]

Here's a look at the #1 seeds, how the Big 12 was seeded and where Iowa State landed.

Let the Dance Begin

Overall #1’s. I don’t think there were really any surprises here. The top four schools have skirted around these spots throughout the season. South Carolina, Texas and UConn each droppe…

twistersistersummary.wordpress.com

 

[CYdTracked]

It is disappointing we started the season as a top 10 team and finished barely making the tournament. There were some positives late in the season going 7-2 in our last 9 including a big win against KSU and playing Baylor tough in the Big 12 tournament who were the 2 losses in that stretch. When we at our best we can play with top 25 teams but we need more than Addy and Audi to be on their game to play with better teams.

I sure as hell hope we can get past Princeton else this was a massive failure of a season. After that we play with house money as the underdog and see what happens.

 

[legi]

I know we technically made the tournament but in my “old man yelling at the clouds” mind the play in game is not the tournament. Win the PIG and only then are you in the tournament.

The season has been a disappointment considering the expectations. Make the S16 and I’ll change my mind.

 

[acoustimac]

It is disappointing we started the season as a top 10 team and finished barely making the tournament. There were some positives late in the season going 7-2 in our last 9 including a big win against KSU and playing Baylor tough in the Big 12 tournament who were the 2 losses in that stretch. When we at our best we can play with top 25 teams but we need more than Addy and Audi to be on their game to play with better teams.

I sure as hell hope we can get past Princeton else this was a massive failure of a season. After that we play with house money as the underdog and see what happens.

Pretty much nailed it on the head.

 

[loyalsons4evertrue]

I know we technically made the tournament but in my “old man yelling at the clouds” mind the play in game is not the tournament. Win the PIG and only then are you in the tournament.

The season has been a disappointment considering the expectations. Make the S16 and I’ll change my mind.

honestly, if we beat Princeton and Michigan, I'd be happy....there's no way we beat Notre Dame though

 

[acoustimac]

honestly, if we beat Princeton and Michigan, I'd be happy....there's no way we beat Notre Dame though

Notre dame would rank up close to the UConn win.

 

[Joseph Hathaway]

Got tickets to the play in game front row $11

 

[acoustimac]

Got tickets to the play in game front row $11

Wish I could be there.

 

[loyalsons4evertrue]

Notre dame would rank up close to the UConn win.

when I watch Notre Dame, they are just freakishly athletic and we tend to struggle with athletic teams. Plus, Hannah Hidalgo is one of the best defenders in the entire country as a point guard and she'd give Em and AJ a really tough time....and if there's one achilles heel on this team, it's turnovers

 

[Jnecker4cy]

Notre Dame has hit a rough patch at the end of the season lost 3 of the last 4th. So they are struggling themselves right now. Would love the chance to play them this week.

 

[ZorkClone]

Loss against Princeton- Bad, season is a pretty deep disappointment.

Win against Princeton, lose to Michigan- Okay, Michigan is good team.

Win against Princeton, win against Michigan, lose to ND- more than satisfied with our tournament performance.

Win against Princeton, win against Michigan, win against ND-Gravy, ecstatic with our tournament performance.

 

[Jnecker4cy]

The Team, Pep Band, Cheer Squad, Cy are all off at like 1pm from Des Moines Today to South Bend. My son had to be at the music building at 930 to meet the bus down to the Charter in Des Moines.

Go Cyclones

 

[mred]

My glance at Princeton:

47 NET, 1-3 Q1, 3-1 Q2, 4-3 Q3. That Q3 record is pretty awful.

• Q1 win was somewhat marginal: @ #34 Harvard. They lost by 3 @ #26 Utah back in early December, which is pretty solid.
• Q2 loss was at home vs. #42 Columbia. They did beat MTSU at home by 13 (we beat them by 16 on a neutral court).
• Q3 losses are bad: by 19 @ #85 Portland, by 8 @ #100 Quinnipiac, by 10 @ #125 Duquesne. However the last one of these was early December so they may be a very different team now.

Most years they probably wouldn't have made it, but the bubble was very weak this year. (Not that it doesn't apply to ISU as well.)

Princeton lost one of their best players (Madison St. Rose) to an ACL tear back in November after only 4 games.

They do not shoot the three quite as well or quite as prolifically as we do, but they aren't much lower. There will be multiple perimeter threats on the court at all times.

They also have two 6'4" players that combine to play around 34 minutes per game, so they do have height. Neither one really stands out on the stat sheet, but they do both shoot and rebound well -- neither appears to just be a big body to put in the middle.

As a team, they have a pretty mediocre A/TO ratio just barely over 1.0. Their steals and block numbers are similar to ours, so don't expect them to be aggressive defensively.

I thought their pace of play seemed slow (fewer FGA per game than us despite WAY fewer FTA) and stathead agrees: we are #87 in pace at 72.5 possessions/40, and they are #346 at 65.2. I guess that means they do not tend to push the pace at all. On defense, I'm guessing that means they play a kind of defense we were really good at a few years ago -- stay in front of the opposing players and force them to take jump shots.

 

[ZorkClone]

My glance at Princeton:

47 NET, 1-3 Q1, 3-1 Q2, 4-3 Q3. That Q3 record is pretty awful.

• Q1 win was somewhat marginal: @ #34 Harvard. They lost by 3 @ #26 Utah back in early December, which is pretty solid.
• Q2 loss was at home vs. #42 Columbia. They did beat MTSU at home by 13 (we beat them by 16 on a neutral court).
• Q3 losses are bad: by 19 @ #85 Portland, by 8 @ #100 Quinnipiac, by 10 @ #125 Duquesne. However the last one of these was early December so they may be a very different team now.

Most years they probably wouldn't have made it, but the bubble was very weak this year. (Not that it doesn't apply to ISU as well.)

Princeton lost one of their best players (Madison St. Rose) to an ACL tear back in November after only 4 games.

They do not shoot the three quite as well or quite as prolifically as we do, but they aren't much lower. There will be multiple perimeter threats on the court at all times.

They also have two 6'4" players that combine to play around 34 minutes per game, so they do have height. Neither one really stands out on the stat sheet, but they do both shoot and rebound well -- neither appears to just be a big body to put in the middle.

As a team, they have a pretty mediocre A/TO ratio just barely over 1.0. Their steals and block numbers are similar to ours, so don't expect them to be aggressive defensively.

I thought their pace of play seemed slow (fewer FGA per game than us despite WAY fewer FTA) and stathead agrees: we are #87 in pace at 72.5 possessions/40, and they are #346 at 65.2. I guess that means they do not tend to push the pace at all. On defense, I'm guessing that means they play a kind of defense we were really good at a few years ago -- stay in front of the opposing players and force them to take jump shots.

Sounds like we should match up pretty well.

 

[ZorkClone]

Wow they only landed like two hours ago.

 

[acoustimac]

My glance at Princeton:

47 NET, 1-3 Q1, 3-1 Q2, 4-3 Q3. That Q3 record is pretty awful.

• Q1 win was somewhat marginal: @ #34 Harvard. They lost by 3 @ #26 Utah back in early December, which is pretty solid.
• Q2 loss was at home vs. #42 Columbia. They did beat MTSU at home by 13 (we beat them by 16 on a neutral court).
• Q3 losses are bad: by 19 @ #85 Portland, by 8 @ #100 Quinnipiac, by 10 @ #125 Duquesne. However the last one of these was early December so they may be a very different team now.

Most years they probably wouldn't have made it, but the bubble was very weak this year. (Not that it doesn't apply to ISU as well.)

Princeton lost one of their best players (Madison St. Rose) to an ACL tear back in November after only 4 games.

They do not shoot the three quite as well or quite as prolifically as we do, but they aren't much lower. There will be multiple perimeter threats on the court at all times.

They also have two 6'4" players that combine to play around 34 minutes per game, so they do have height. Neither one really stands out on the stat sheet, but they do both shoot and rebound well -- neither appears to just be a big body to put in the middle.

As a team, they have a pretty mediocre A/TO ratio just barely over 1.0. Their steals and block numbers are similar to ours, so don't expect them to be aggressive defensively.

I thought their pace of play seemed slow (fewer FGA per game than us despite WAY fewer FTA) and stathead agrees: we are #87 in pace at 72.5 possessions/40, and they are #346 at 65.2. I guess that means they do not tend to push the pace at all. On defense, I'm guessing that means they play a kind of defense we were really good at a few years ago -- stay in front of the opposing players and force them to take jump shots.

Just posted my preview of them and parallels what you've said.

 

[mwwbbfan]

My glance at Princeton:

47 NET, 1-3 Q1, 3-1 Q2, 4-3 Q3. That Q3 record is pretty awful.

• Q1 win was somewhat marginal: @ #34 Harvard. They lost by 3 @ #26 Utah back in early December, which is pretty solid.
• Q2 loss was at home vs. #42 Columbia. They did beat MTSU at home by 13 (we beat them by 16 on a neutral court).
• Q3 losses are bad: by 19 @ #85 Portland, by 8 @ #100 Quinnipiac, by 10 @ #125 Duquesne. However the last one of these was early December so they may be a very different team now.

Most years they probably wouldn't have made it, but the bubble was very weak this year. (Not that it doesn't apply to ISU as well.)

Princeton lost one of their best players (Madison St. Rose) to an ACL tear back in November after only 4 games.

They do not shoot the three quite as well or quite as prolifically as we do, but they aren't much lower. There will be multiple perimeter threats on the court at all times.

They also have two 6'4" players that combine to play around 34 minutes per game, so they do have height. Neither one really stands out on the stat sheet, but they do both shoot and rebound well -- neither appears to just be a big body to put in the middle.

As a team, they have a pretty mediocre A/TO ratio just barely over 1.0. Their steals and block numbers are similar to ours, so don't expect them to be aggressive defensively.

I thought their pace of play seemed slow (fewer FGA per game than us despite WAY fewer FTA) and stathead agrees: we are #87 in pace at 72.5 possessions/40, and they are #346 at 65.2. I guess that means they do not tend to push the pace at all. On defense, I'm guessing that means they play a kind of defense we were really good at a few years ago -- stay in front of the opposing players and force them to take jump shots.

I watched a half of one game of theirs archived on ESPN plus so am an expert now - they do not appear physical at all so if we play like a Big 12 game officiating may be key.