They weren't athletic enough to play defense with their feet last night. One dribble was all it took to get past the defender pretty much all night.
Tough day for EIU hoops hopes
- Thread starter MuskieCy
- Start date
Iowa has some glaring issues that need fixed, notably guard play and interior defense. Definitely have some concerns if you're a hawk fan.
At the same time, they'll get plenty of wins from the bottom of the B10. With the way McCaffery teams play an upset or two at home. Find a way to get Bowen and Freeman more run. Krikke's mid range game is a good weapon (we played great defense to take that away from him last night).
Right now I'd peg IA as an NIT team with an opportunity to get a low NCAA seed if things go right. But same issues that have plagued Fran's teams in March. Not good enough guard play to get to the second weekend, barring a favorable upset in their section of the bracket.
At the same time, they'll get plenty of wins from the bottom of the B10. With the way McCaffery teams play an upset or two at home. Find a way to get Bowen and Freeman more run. Krikke's mid range game is a good weapon (we played great defense to take that away from him last night).
Right now I'd peg IA as an NIT team with an opportunity to get a low NCAA seed if things go right. But same issues that have plagued Fran's teams in March. Not good enough guard play to get to the second weekend, barring a favorable upset in their section of the bracket.
What teams has Mad Fran ever had that wanted to play a slower style of game? His whole MO is to outscore the other team and get to the foul line to do that. He wants to play as fast as possible to speed up the game, and get his time to the foul line. Teams like ISU and Michigan State are not going to allow them to play that style of play, so they must shoot a high percent of threes to make up for it.
ISU was doubling Krikke every time he got the ball down low, and the kid really struggled with it, that is not something that Purdue or Creighton did.
That has always been the Hawkeyes' strategy for making the tournament, though.
Somebody posted an article on here about how Iowa State and Iowa form a perfect example of what a "new school" tournament resume looks like and what an "old school" one looks like.
Iowa State
---
outwardly unimpressive W/L record overall and in conference
excellent analytical measures
few/no bad losses
pile of Q1 and Q1A games and wins
translation: one of the better teams in the country just had a bear of a schedule
they deserve to make the tournament
Iowa
---
attractive W/L record overall and in a "power" conference
middling to unimpressive analytical measure (though they do score a ton)
couple bad losses
relatively few Q1 games and even fewer wins
translation: not actually all that good but you can't turn down a team with that many wins
we kind of have to let them in the tournament
Iowa is set to try and do that again.
I did notice that. Iowa kept trying to give Krikke the ball in the short corner. Iowa State would always trap him. And he'd panic and it would invariably* end with a contested shot or passing back out of it.
*Okay not every time. Once he managed to step through the double team and pass to a cutter for an easy layup. Another time he got his shot off quick, before the help came, and made a little jay.
He ended up with eight. More than I thought. But even that was inefficient (-3.4 net).
Iowa just seemed totally unprepared for that defense. Zero ideas on how to attack it.
Might only get 9 bids this year. It's tough out there.
One would think this, but year after year after year, the Big 10 squeaks in some really average teams.
That might even be optimistic.
# of bids by P6 league on Torvik right now...
Big 12 = 10/14 (71.4%) (KSU, UCF, OSU, and WVU out right now)
Big Ten = 7/14 (50.0%) (Purdue, WI, IL, TOSU, Mich St., NW, IU in)
SEC = 7/14 (50.0%) (TN, A&M, Auburn, Alabama, UF, UK, MSU in)
Big East = 5/11 (45.5%) (UConn, Creighton, Marquette, Nova, Providence in)
ACC = 5/15 (33.3%) (UNC, Clemson, UVA, Duke, and The U in)
Pac-12 = 4/12 (33.3%) (Zona, CO, Utah, USC in)
Adding to myself...
We're going to lose Oklahoma and Texas, who are projected tournament teams, next year.
But gain Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah. Only ASU is projected "out."
So New New Big 12 = 11/16 (68.75%)
And the other conferences after the other shifts...
New New SEC = 9/16 (64.3%) (adds OU and UT)
Big East is unchanged (45.5%)
New New Big Ten = 8/18 (44.4%) (only USC is a tournament team right now)
New New ACC = 5/18 (27.8%) (nada out of Cal, Stanford, and $MU)
The SEC is going to be a problem. They're the most likely challenger to Big 12 dominance.
We're going to lose Oklahoma and Texas, who are projected tournament teams, next year.
But gain Arizona, Arizona State, Colorado, and Utah. Only ASU is projected "out."
So New New Big 12 = 11/16 (68.75%)
And the other conferences after the other shifts...
New New SEC = 9/16 (64.3%) (adds OU and UT)
Big East is unchanged (45.5%)
New New Big Ten = 8/18 (44.4%) (only USC is a tournament team right now)
New New ACC = 5/18 (27.8%) (nada out of Cal, Stanford, and $MU)
The SEC is going to be a problem. They're the most likely challenger to Big 12 dominance.
I hear he might be on the outs, he was serving up water that wasn’t sourced in Ames.
There goal is the same every year, get 20 wins, pull and upset or two and then rely on being in a Power 6 conference to get into the tournament. It generally works and when it doesn't they make the NIT and their fans crow about how they should have made the NCAA's.
Really its no different then their football team has been doing the past 20 years, but for them it means getting a New Years bowl game, which up until next season with the new teams just meant finishing in the top 5/6 teams.
To be fair to Iowa everbody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.
VT and A&M don't see that defense every 12 months and found ways to break it down.
The Big 12 seems to at least have an idea what to do against it now.
Iowa had nothing. It's not like they didn't know it was coming.
They will, over and over again, keep peddling the narrative that the teams beat one another up, play great defense etc. when the numbers don't show it because most fans don't take the time to actually look at those numbers.
After ISU beat WI two years ago I mentioned to a Bucky fan that WI simply hadn't seen a defense like that for about 2-3 months, and they bent back to the B1G having some really good defenses and simply didn't listen when I pointed out the numbers.
These fanbases are quite literally the living proof of how media (BTN, ESPN) can influence their thought process.
I didn't think ISU was great on either side of the court in that tourney.
So long as ISU holds serve over the next three weeks they'll see another good test in Norman.
Yeah, ISU built a lead and then thought they could coast. Rob talked in the post game about learning from that and it showed against Iowa.
The B10 is way weaker than the B12. They'll win half of those and be a bubble team.