Twister Sister Summary - Season ends in the worst way

[acoustimac]

This was another game I had to watch again. I got too emotional and got on the bad officiating, rough ATM play bandwagon. Did I change my mind? Yes.

1st qtr
The threes were falling...all game. Right out of the chute they were falling. The ladies tried to go under against the big and got blocked twice in a row. The ladies needed to be smarter. The inside game was forced all quarter. We missed at least 5-6 layups. We still look slow adjusting to drives on defense and this would be a recurring theme. Then there was that turnover bug...silly mistakes. Forced passes or bad decisions.

Kane had a couple of nice strong boards and we saw good ball movement. (Note - We are REALLY slow defending drives)

Despite the turnovers and all the missed layups, things looked good at the end of the first. Six treys in the first. Next to last play of the quarter with Joens driving was the perfect example of how forced the inside game was. Aubrey Joens hit a looonnngg three to close the quarter with a nice 22-12 lead.

2nd
The ladies started off with another botched inside play (unforced turnover) Wow...the inside game continues to be a big mess. Bad passes, bad shots, bad results. ATM came out and started hitting and all of a sudden the lead was down to a single possession after 6 straight. ATM was sticking around until the offense started to smooth things out inside. Mainly Joens. As the announcer said...it was about splitting the defense versus going at the defense. Then Donarski went right back to going at the defense. I should have been tallying the missed layups. There were a bunch. I have to give ATM credit...their defense is quick and aggressive. Last possession of the half was a mess. 35-30 cyclones.

3rd
The Ladies started in a zone which ATM promptly scored on. ISU answered back with another trey from Scott. For limited minutes she really made the most of it. The unforced turnovers continue. Some are mystifying. Again..."what are you thinking" type of stuff. The big threes edged the sisters out to a ten point lead 45-35 with six to go.

It seemed we deferred to the three sometimes out of desperation. Midway through the quarter our made shots was 2-1 treys. Another trey by Donarski pushed the lead to 11 with three to play. Another trey would put the lead to 12. That was as good as it got. The run was led by Donarski.

The last two minutes was the first time I saw refs really missing any calls. A charge should have been picked up by Joens that instead led to two ATM points. End of three and it was 57-48. So far so good.

4th
ATM scored the first 6 points of the quarter and the turnover bug hit us again. I mean how do you explain a pass to no one or Joens taking her eye off a pass and see it slip through her fingers? This was when I really started noticing some missed calls. Push offs, slaps, mugging under the basket. They did miss a travel on Joens too. If we had the officiating from game 1 I think things would be a little different

With just under six to play ISU enjoyed a 66-57 lead thanks to another three. If I didn’t know the outcome I’d be thinking we were in good shape. Then ATM pulled within 3 on free throws with two minutes left. ATM just couldn’t miss. They took good shots and made them. And lordy....the 20th turnover was another unforced shot clock violation. The lead shrank to one after that with :58 left. Joens powered to a shot and one to make it 4 points with :35 left. ATM answered quickly thanks to a one on three rebound. ATM had to foul and did. Everything was going our way. Joens made both free throws and we led by four with 20 seconds left. ATM hit again after an offensive push. They just didn’t miss. Ok...the tied ball on Donarski was never actually tied up. Was she fouled? Perhaps. ATM took advantage of the slowness of our team to score in only 4 seconds on a drive to the hoop which left our defender in the dust. Tie game. There was another bad no call moment as Joens got fouled on the inbounds play. No call was made. Joens appeared to be fouled under the basket, but the camera shot was so far away I couldn’t tell for sure. Overtime we come.

Ok...so how did we lose the 4th? We were playing good D and rebounding fairly well. We answered shots ATM made. The blocked three by Ryan was mystifying. An offensive foul turned the ball over again. We put ATM in the bonus. Remember that speed difference I mentioned earlier. It cost us. On offense we looked like mice scattering during the last three minutes. No screens. Lots of standing around. The tied ball was questionable at best, but all Donarski had to do was dribble when she got the inbounds. Giving ATM another chance was just the coup de gras. ATM out scored us 27-18 in the fourth.

Overtime
This was just hard to write about. Much like the Texas game we battled. LIke Texas, ATM took the lead right away with a three. For the first time we were battling from behind. The ladies responded and Joens made a nice dish to Kane for the lead. Kane made two huge rebounds to help ISU to a 2 point lead. We got beat on another drive for two and the unforced turnover bug hit again at the worst time. ISU got a stop at the other end and Kane grabbed another board. Then...another unforced turnover...this time by Joens. On our last possession Joens kept the ball and everyone knew she wasn’t going to pass...that included ATM. She tried to force up a shot through two defenders and turned the ball over. I wish I could say I saw a foul. But again the camera shot was so far away I could tell. What was worse was allowing ATM to go full court with next to no defensive pressure and score from about six feet. Quickness anyone? Sad way to end, but the overtime was a snapshot of the game - turnovers and being smoked by faster players.


Observations
The inside game was a bit of a mess. Lots of missed layups and part of those were technique and others were poor choices. It often reminded me of mosquitoes looking for a way into a room through a screen door. We just kept running into the screen instead of waiting for the door to open.

Inside game part II - there were very few effective screens set to open up drives. Our drives were more of the one on one or one on two variety

Turnovers - ok...this was a mixed bag. We had a bunch of plain old unforced, dribble off your foot type of turnovers. The "what were you thinking" type of turnovers. This is what cost us the game.

Speed - In both NCAA games we looked slow. Especially on defense. We can’t handle drives or screens well. If you look back at some of my write ups during the conference season I mentioned the same thing. In both NCAA games we allowed the opponent to go full court in less than four seconds and score. ATM did this at the end of regulation and at the end of overtime.

You have to appreciate how the ladies battled. We were shorter, slower and less experienced. While those factors contributed to the loss, we just kept fighting and had chances to pull the upset.

We were down two players. Not having Scott or MnM hurt.

Officiating. Yes, there were some suspect calls (the ref calling the tied ball couldn’t even see it) and a few blown calls, but overall this game wasn’t a typical “we got mugged” ATM game. Yes, ATM was aggressive. But, overall I didn’t see what I thought I had seen. Were there some missed calls at critical times? Absolutely. BUT I’ll still point the finger at 24 turnovers...most of which were unforced as the biggest factor in the loss.

The season ends...no matter what you have to admit it was entertaining. The freshmen def lived up to their hype and still have lots of growth to do. Joens was Joens and the seniors may not have been as heralded as other senior classes, but they provided leadership. Scott continued to be a scoring threat while Wise and Johnson had their moments here and there. It’s def been a fun year. Looking forward to next year being even better.

 

[dirtyninety]

Yep

 

[isucy86]

We have a pretty nice team returning next year and it can be very good if the incoming freshman post players can defend, rebound, contest shots. Could see ISU being Big 12 #2 preseason behind Baylor.

IMO what is preventing this team from being special is an uber athletic 6'2" defender. She doesn't have to be much on offense. But having a stud perimeter defender with some length would be great. She could also add some rebounding.

 

[Neptune78]

Love the summary, but 'worst way' to end the season would have been with a uninspired, effortless, 30 point blowout. The Cyclones were the better basketball team last night and they played a hellava game.
Can't wait for next season.

 

[CyclonesFan4ever]

I wrote a post early this morning in the record-long game thread. I thought it's more appropriate I post here to accompany acoustimac's game summary.

I did a technical analysis of ISU shooting and turnovers of the game. I hope you guys find it useful.

The following is the ISU vs TAMU shot chart (from ESPN). ISU's on the left.



ISU Shooting Stats Analysis:

Overall FG 26-64, 2PT FG 10-34, 3PT FG 16-30.

As you can see from the shot chart, ISU took most shots only in the paint or behind the 3pt line. ISU only took 2 mid-range shots outside the paint (1 for 2, all in the first quarter). They shot 9 of 32 in the paint, which is 28% compared to 60% beyond the 3pt line.

For FG made/attempted in the paint, here's a breakdown quarter by quarter:

1st (0-8), 2nd (3-9), 3rd (2-3), 4th (3-9), OT(1-3)

I've been following CycloneWBB all year long and this is a typical short chart you will see in most of their games. ISU takes the most efficient types of shots used in the NBA which are layups, 3-pointers and free throws, rarely midrange shots.

This kind of shot selection works in most games but when ISU faces opponents with a strong defense or can't get enough foul calls from the refs in a game, they will get into trouble like this game. Give them full credit that they shot the 3 balls extremely well but they finished in the paint very poorly and didn't get enough fouls calls. In the final 4 minutes of the 2nd quarter, ISU was in bonus so they kept driving to the paint expecting to get foul calls but they didn't get any, which resulted in 4 turnovers and 0 points. The same thing happened in the final minutes of the 4th quarter and the overtime, fewer whistles, more turnovers.

There's a word in basketball strategy called "optionality". When facing tough situations when your opponent has taken away all of your best options, it'd be helpful if a team has more offensive options, such as taking uncontested midrange pull-up jumpers or moving the ball to an open area for an uncontested shot. I'm not saying ISU should completely abandon their current shot selection system. I hope the team can add more offensive wrinkles next season. The bottom line is: the best shot is an open/uncontested shot.

Turnover Breakdown:

In this game, ISU has committed a season-high 24 turnovers. I have rewatched and charted every single of them. A lot of them were unforced and the players' fundamental mistakes. Because of it, TAMU had 19 more FG attempts and scored 15 more points than ISU off turnovers.

Travel (6), Bad Pass (6), Lost Ball while Dribbling (4), Shot Clock Violation (3), Offensive Foul (3), Jumpball (2)

Of all the 24 turnovers, one was obviously the officiating error (Lexi jump ball call with 10 sec left in the regulation), the other 2 bad pass turnovers might be caused by the TAMU's physical plays. The rest were just our players' own mistakes. If we could reduce the number of those unforced turnovers in half, we should've had a comfortable lead near the end of the regulation and the refs wouldn't have had any chance to show their ugly rears to bait out TAMU. Our young team averages the least turnovers per game among all Big12 teams in the regular season. It's kind of surprising they committed so many "unforced" errors in the game. I hope they can learn the lesson and improve their fundamental skills in the offseason.

 

[CyclonesFan4ever]

Two more things I want to see this team improve next season.

1) Control what you can control on the court

This is what CBF has been constantly preaching about the things happening off the court. In terms of things you can't control on the court, they are likely officiating-related issues. We have seen on too many occasions in this season that the players forced their way by driving to the teeth of the defense expecting to get foul calls. If this strategy works most of the time, then it's a very efficient way to score on the free-throw line. But the reality is there's too much uncertainty by relying on foul calls. I want to see the team can make proper adjustments when they don't get friendly whistles and can find other efficient ways to score.

2) The 4th Quarter Approach

This is the quarter when great teams like Baylor will do to their opponents. Granted they have better players but a lot of good teams still can hang around with them for three quarters. But when the 4th quarter comes, great teams would unleash their killer mode by putting other teams away. In this season, we have seen our team had some small to moderate lead at the start of the 4th quarter, and then we played conservatively by trying to "protect the lead" instead of "expanding the lead", which resulted in more close games than we would expect. In some 4th quarters, we tend to get away with what got us to the lead (team ball) and turn to the isolation (hero ball). We have seen it work sometimes (the OU and KSU game) but we also saw it backfire (the TAMU and Iowa game). I'm sure the 4th quarter execution will get better as the team becomes more experienced next season. What I want to see is the team can apply a more aggressive approach to the 4th quarter play, or at least keep playing to their strength in the crunch time.

 

[acoustimac]

that’s some great stuff...

 

[Cycsk]

One other factor that I would put next to our turnovers is TAM's shot selection. Look at all the points they left on the floor with their very long 2's, many with their feet on the 3-point line.

 

[acoustimac]

Love the summary, but 'worst way' to end the season would have been with a uninspired, effortless, 30 point blowout. The Cyclones were the better basketball team last night and they played a hellava game.
Can't wait for next season.

i suppose “worst” is a perspective thing. In this case I felt the loss was self inflicted rather than being beaten by a better team (which is also subjective). To advance you typically have to be your best version of you...the team wasn’t.

 

[kcdc4isu]

i suppose “worst” is a perspective thing. In this case I felt the loss was self inflicted rather than being beaten by a better team (which is also subjective). To advance you typically have to be your best version of you...the team wasn’t.

Agree to disagree on not being best version. While I have noted we had too many turnovers if at the end the calls that were made /not made had been correct there is no doubt in my mind we would have won. The phantom jump ball call and the fouls on Ashley's last drive to the basket that were NOT called would have given us free throws that I feel we would have made putting the game in out favor.Those players put it all out there, giving it their best but three people on the court failed to do their job (which has been noted by more than ISU fans) and that was the game.

 

[collegehoops]

Two more things I want to see this team improve next season.

1) Control what you can control on the court

This is what CBF has been constantly preaching about the things happening off the court. In terms of things you can't control on the court, they are likely officiating-related issues. We have seen on too many occasions in this season that the players forced their way by driving to the teeth of the defense expecting to get foul calls. If this strategy works most of the time, then it's a very efficient way to score on the free-throw line. But the reality is there's too much uncertainty by relying on foul calls. I want to see the team can make proper adjustments when they don't get friendly whistles and can find other efficient ways to score.

2) The 4th Quarter Approach

This is the quarter when great teams like Baylor will do to their opponents. Granted they have better players but a lot of good teams still can hang around with them for three quarters. But when the 4th quarter comes, great teams would unleash their killer mode by putting other teams away. In this season, we have seen our team had some small to moderate lead at the start of the 4th quarter, and then we played conservatively by trying to "protect the lead" instead of "expanding the lead", which resulted in more close games than we would expect. In some 4th quarters, we tend to get away with what got us to the lead (team ball) to turn to the isolation (hero ball). We have seen it work sometimes (the OU and KSU game) but we also saw it backfire (the TAMU and Iowa game). I'm sure the 4th quarter execution will get better as the team becomes more experienced next season. What I want to see is the team can apply a more aggressive approach to the 4th quarter play, or at least keep playing to their strength in the crunch time.

 

[mwwbbfan]

Agree to disagree on not being best version. While I have noted we had too many turnovers if at the end the calls that were made /not made had been correct there is no doubt in my mind we would have won. The phantom jump ball call and the fouls on Ashley's last drive to the basket that were NOT called would have given us free throws that I feel we would have made putting the game in out favor.Those players put it all out there, giving it their best but three people on the court failed to do their job (which has been noted by more than ISU fans) and that was the game.

Also - no one seems to recognize that the team we played was 25-2 and the regular season SEC champs. They are an exceptional team. The regular season finale a year ago against Baylor was celebrated as one of the top accomplishments in ISU WBB history. If the foul would not have been called at the end and we lost in overtime would it have been a failure? We would have played the exact same game for 40 minutes but the perception would have been very different. Same for the T A&M game - if they call the foul (as they should have) on the last possession we are celebrating a GREAT win, but the 40 minutes of basketball would not have changed.

 

[Gunnerclone]

I wrote a post early this morning in the record-long game thread. I thought it's more appropriate I post here to accompany acoustimac's game summary.

I did a technical analysis of ISU shooting and turnovers of the game. I hope you guys find it useful.

The following is the ISU vs TAMU shot chart (from ESPN). ISU's on the left.

View attachment 83320

ISU Shooting Stats Analysis:

Overall FG 26-64, 2PT FG 10-34, 3PT FG 16-30.

As you can see from the shot chart, ISU took most shots only in the paint or behind the 3pt line. ISU only took 2 mid-range shots outside the paint (1 for 2, all in the first quarter). They shot 9 of 32 in the paint, which is 28% compared to 60% beyond the 3pt line.

For FG made/attempted in the paint, here's a breakdown quarter by quarter:

1st (0-8), 2nd (3-9), 3rd (2-3), 4th (3-9), OT(1-3)

I've been following CycloneWBB all year long and this is a typical short chart you will see in most of their games. ISU takes the most efficient types of shots used in the NBA which are layups, 3-pointers and free throws, rarely midrange shots.

This kind of shot selection works in most games but when ISU faces opponents with a strong defense or can't get enough foul calls from the refs in a game, they will get into trouble like this game. Give them full credit that they shot the 3 balls extremely well but they finished in the paint very poorly and didn't get enough fouls calls. In the final 4 minutes of the 2nd quarter, ISU was in bonus so they kept driving to the paint expecting to get foul calls but they didn't get any, which resulted in 4 turnovers and 0 points. The same thing happened in the final minutes of the 4th quarter and the overtime, fewer whistles, more turnovers.

There's a word in basketball strategy called "optionality". When facing tough situations when your opponent has taken away all of your best options, it'd be helpful if a team has more offensive options, such as taking uncontested midrange pull-up jumpers or moving the ball to an open area for an uncontested shot. I'm not saying ISU should completely abandon their current shot selection system. I hope the team can add more offensive wrinkles next season. The bottom line is: the best shot is an open/uncontested shot.

Turnover Breakdown:

In this game, ISU has committed a season-high 24 turnovers. I have rewatched and charted every single of them. A lot of them were unforced and the players' fundamental mistakes. Because of it, TAMU had 19 more FG attempts and scored 15 more points than ISU off turnovers.

Travel (6), Bad Pass (6), Lost Ball while Dribbling (4), Shot Clock Violation (3), Offensive Foul (3), Jumpball (2)

Of all the 24 turnovers, one was obviously the officiating error (Lexi jump ball call with 10 sec left in the regulation), the other 2 bad pass turnovers might be caused by the TAMU's physical plays. The rest were just our players' own mistakes. If we could reduce the number of those unforced turnovers in half, we should've had a comfortable lead near the end of the regulation and the refs wouldn't have had any chance to show their ugly rears to bait out TAMU. Our young team averages the least turnovers per game among all Big12 teams in the regular season. It's kind of surprising they committed so many "unforced" errors in the game. I hope they can learn the lesson and improve their fundamental skills in the offseason.

I hope we see that ISU shot chart many many times for the women and the men next year.

 

[Clonefan32]

Also - no one seems to recognize that the team we played was 25-2 and the regular season SEC champs. They are an exceptional team. The regular season finale a year ago against Baylor was celebrated as one of the top accomplishments in ISU WBB history. If the foul would not have been called at the end and we lost in overtime would it have been a failure? We would have played the exact same game for 40 minutes but the perception would have been very different. Same for the T A&M game - if they call the foul (as they should have) on the last possession we are celebrating a GREAT win, but the 40 minutes of basketball would not have changed.

Yes and no. Competing against a team like A&M is a feat in and of itself. It is. But I also think it's important not to lose sight of the fact you don't get a ton of great chances like this.

They win and they are playing a Arizona team that struggled with 11 seed BYU. Win that and you play NC State, who is probably the most beatable of 1 seeds. You get past A&M and it's all right there in front of you.

So yes it's great we were competitive, but moral victories are hard to get too excited about. Just look at the men after the 2014 Sweet 16. It hurt to lose, but you figured we'd have more chances with our young core. Never got that close again.

 

[BoxsterCy]

Also - no one seems to recognize that the team we played was 25-2 and the regular season SEC champs. They are an exceptional team. The regular season finale a year ago against Baylor was celebrated as one of the top accomplishments in ISU WBB history. If the foul would not have been called at the end and we lost in overtime would it have been a failure? We would have played the exact same game for 40 minutes but the perception would have been very different. Same for the T A&M game - if they call the foul (as they should have) on the last possession we are celebrating a GREAT win, but the 40 minutes of basketball would not have changed.

We shot over 50% from three and Joens scored 30 plus to have the lead and stay on top of a #2 seed for most of 40 minutes. We played about as good as we can. Turnovers kept it from being a perfect game but we weren't playing Texas Tech here.

I would like to have made the Sweet Sixteen to make up for the much easier at home path we had in 2019 and weren't able to capitalize on. This loss sucks but that loss was worse to me from an expectation perspective. However, all and all, the team pretty much matched expectations. They were somewhat over rated early by being in the top 25. End of season rankings, NET and seeding had us just outside that as a Top 30 team. Big 12 coaches picked ISU at 3rd and without an overachieving WVU and OSU out 12-6 might have even been good for second. I am not sure that a healthy Espenmiller-McGraw and a completely healthy Scott would have bumped the win total much but the win total with those injuries factored in is pretty good. Staying mostly Covid free allowed the team to pretty much practice and play without interruption, something many other teams were not able to do so I think final season results are a pretty fair measure. No, what if related to missing a bunch of games and practices etc.

Not worth digging into CF posters predictions but if IIRC most predictions here, even optimistic ones, didn't have us in the Sweet Sixteen or Elite 8. Depending on if any seniors stay and who might transfer in, next years outlook could be higher, maybe Sweet Sixteen as some sort of benchmark but I'm not going there till we see who is here and who is not. Not looking at the league to be particularly deep again. OSU will have a time repeating their performance losing so many seniors. WVU with full roster, maybe. Texas has a great looking recruiting class and Collier can be a bust in big games so maybe they are better or at least maintain. Who knows who Texas might bring in via transfer.

 

[CyclonesFan4ever]

Yes and no. Competing against a team like A&M is a feat in and of itself. It is. But I also think it's important not to lose sight of the fact you don't get a ton of great chances like this.

They win and they are playing a Arizona team that struggled with 11 seed BYU. Win that and you play NC State, who is probably the most beatable of 1 seeds. You get past A&M and it's all right there in front of you.

So yes it's great we were competitive, but moral victories are hard to get too excited about. Just look at the men after the 2014 Sweet 16. It hurt to lose, but you figured we'd have more chances with our young core. Never got that close again.

The night after we lost to aTm, I got the same feeling as I did when hearing the news that Georges Niang broke his foot in the 2014 NCAA tournament. That might have been our MBB's best opportunity to get to the Final Four. Although the next 3-year's teams were great, they have never gotten any closer.

Yes, next year's team will 100% get better on paper, but you can't predict the team will be injury-free or draw better matchups in the postseason unless they can win enough regular-season games and get ranked at the top 10 consistently next season.

To me, it's a huge missed opportunity, even for a young team to a certain degree.

Just as CW said before, it's not easy to be a Cyclone fan, always get a nut cup ready.

 

[acoustimac]

Agree to disagree on not being best version. While I have noted we had too many turnovers if at the end the calls that were made /not made had been correct there is no doubt in my mind we would have won. The phantom jump ball call and the fouls on Ashley's last drive to the basket that were NOT called would have given us free throws that I feel we would have made putting the game in out favor.Those players put it all out there, giving it their best but three people on the court failed to do their job (which has been noted by more than ISU fans) and that was the game.

don't disagree with you at all. I think we are saying similar things. My point only being...cut the turnovers by ten and we never go to overtime and those calls never happen or are irrelevant. I also agree with the other points that we played a game that wasn’t our best (amazing in some ways...bad in others) and we were there to the end.

 

[collegehoops]

ABSOLUTELY SPOT ON CyclonesFan4ever!
Making proper adjustments, being flexible, playing team ball (the entire game) and in particular designing the offense to allow players to play to their strengths are the hallmarks of a top level coach. It seems as if CBF is only an advocate of "playing to your potential" while not giving much credence to "playing to your strengths". He is in love with his 3 on 3 offense with the 2 & 3 players standing in the corners regardless of personnel (this square peg WILL fit into this round hole no matter what dammit). This offense can be effective against some of our competition, but more often than not against superior competition who is quicker, faster, etc. where we can't dribble by or post up those types of teams, it appears he isn't able to "shift gears" and make the necessary adjustments. Implementing more player movement from all five players, (see Coaches Bluder and Baranczyk right here in our state) less dribbling, quicker ball movement (with ball reversals), basket cuts, screens and slip screens, will get better results against teams that are physically superior to us. Against these types of teams, ALL FIVE PLAYERS must be HARD TO GUARD. You just cannot allow two opponent defenders to constantly rest on "D" and be so readily available to help their other three teammates without making them pay. Our kids play very good defense overall. Much of it is a solid man to man - a huge credit to CBF. In nearly every game, we work harder on defense than our opponents. That is a great thing and speaks volumes. However, this is true not only because of our big hearts and hustle, but because number 1: numerous opponents force us to work hard by running us to death off of screen after screen, and number 2: we do not make our opponents work very hard (or at least as hard as we often times must work) on numerous possessions.

A bit more on playing to your strengths and allowing players to have the freedom to do so. We've always admired the way good friend Jennie Baranczyk at Drake teaches her players her motion offense and then allows her players the freedom to play to their strengths. Her teams are constantly putting pressure on their opponents by getting up and down the floor, having outstanding off the ball movement, and are always looking for the open player. Her ability to teach her players to read the defense and take what is given them is remarkable. Jennie's teams seem to always be in the top tier in assists nationally.. with multiple players racking up impressive assist totals and not just the point guard. All five of her players on the court are hard to guard at all times, having numerous possessions over the course of a game with all five kids touching the ball over a possession. It's a big reason why the Bulldogs shoot so well. Here's what she has to say: "Our motion offense allows for a lot of reads, which allows a lot of autonomy to our players. The offense allows us to do a good job of setting each other up. The players all know all the positions, and they all set screens and know when to pass". I believe the ISU coaching staff would admit that Drake is one of the toughest scouts each season... even though talent wise, the Cyclones are superior. With the type of players that CBF recruits (cerebral kids with high basketball intellect) adding this motion offense "option" to the Cyclone offensive repertoire is much recommended, particularly against opponents that we cannot go toe to toe with athletically/physically.