Small Ball
- Thread starter Mohawkeye
- Start date
One thing on the subject I've not seen mentioned. On a recently offered podcast with Coach Francis he mentioned that food is being stuffed into Uthoff with the intention to build him up. Considering that there is not an ounce of fat on the kid if they can get him up from 208 to 220 or more he would suffice quite well at power forward. I can think of no particular reason to force-feed him if we're planning to leave him at small forward.
I think we're going to see Woody, Uthoff, Jones and Wagner at the five and four in some fashion. By extension I think Jok is heading to the wing forward spot so we can get guys that are better passers and ball handlers into the game. Look for more running, and more threes. As to defense we've still got Woody to enjoy, and when he is out our guys will have to front the bigs and practice good ball denial defense.
Would we have taken another center or big power forward in 2015? Sure, and we went after some. We got what we have, we weren't going to suddenly get so big as to matchup size wise to Maryland or Purdue anyway, so why not do something different?
I think we're going to see Woody, Uthoff, Jones and Wagner at the five and four in some fashion. By extension I think Jok is heading to the wing forward spot so we can get guys that are better passers and ball handlers into the game. Look for more running, and more threes. As to defense we've still got Woody to enjoy, and when he is out our guys will have to front the bigs and practice good ball denial defense.
Would we have taken another center or big power forward in 2015? Sure, and we went after some. We got what we have, we weren't going to suddenly get so big as to matchup size wise to Maryland or Purdue anyway, so why not do something different?
Last edited:
Just need to recruit another Curry and get some favorable officiating, and we would be in business...
For some reason I think Fran decided a couple years ago that he was never going to have his kind of team unless he quit trying to recruit a prototypical B10 team...and decided to go all run and gun with interchangeable players.
"His type of players or none at all" type thing. If they all happen to be 6'3" to 6'7", so be it.
"His type of players or none at all" type thing. If they all happen to be 6'3" to 6'7", so be it.
From the article:
"..... The Warriors rallied back, thanks in part to a "small-ball" lineup that featured two point guards in Stephen Curry and Shaun Livingston, two wings in Klay Thompson and Harrison Barnes, and the 6'7" Draymond Green playing "center."
PG Mike Gesell
PG Anthony Clemmons
Wing Peter Jok
Wing Jarrod Uthoff
Center Ahmad Wagner / Dale Jones
Is that the Iowa equivalent? Wagner is probably the closest roster player to a physical "Center" such as Green.
"..... The Warriors rallied back, thanks in part to a "small-ball" lineup that featured two point guards in Stephen Curry and Shaun Livingston, two wings in Klay Thompson and Harrison Barnes, and the 6'7" Draymond Green playing "center."
PG Mike Gesell
PG Anthony Clemmons
Wing Peter Jok
Wing Jarrod Uthoff
Center Ahmad Wagner / Dale Jones
Is that the Iowa equivalent? Wagner is probably the closest roster player to a physical "Center" such as Green.
If one presumes a starting lineup of:
Gesell, Clemmons, Jok, Uthoff, Woodbury
Anytime Woodbury sits, presumption #2 of Jones backing him up, we have a chance at a scary lineup offensively with a stretch four and a stretch five. Opposing teams will have to bring their post defenders out or leave us open somewhere.
It also explains the amount of wings we recruited as, presumption #3 Williams learns the point and now we've got Ellingson, Fleming and Moss competing for playing time at the two and three, and presumption #4 Hutton is a Michigan like three/four in the mold of Glenn Robinson III and Zak Irvin (I've seen talk that the 6'6" 215 lb Irvin will start at the four).
We'll also have competition from Uhl, Wagner and Baer for time at the three/four.
It is easy to see where the three ball, dribble drive, and quicker athletes crashing the boards could all be part of what McCaffery has described as a "different team". And playing time for the newbies becomes a matter of earning the spot over other newbies.
If we remove Clemmons and put Jok and Uthoff where they were last year, the four and five become thin, and there is a bottleneck at the wings. I don't think that was the intention. I think as late as before we offered Jones the only difference was we'd have liked to have landed another post player. We just didn't find one at the talent level we require.
I think, we're very close to the preferred lineups McCaffery wants to go with of:
pg, sg, sf, pf, c alternating with pg, sg, sf, sf, pf lineups.
If we had intention to play bigger, I think we'd have seen times when Olaseni was at the pf, instead we saw Uhl take those minutes.
Another reason I can think of that might make sense of these opinions, we're actively recruiting a big to replace Woody, and we've got Pemsl to take Uthoff's spot. But with the remaining two scholarships we're after a point guard and clearly the last scholarship could go to just about any position. I'm inclined to believe that pf, c at all times idea would require two c's and a pf...than why be offering players like Santos?
I like it, make teams match up to us, or get more out of the mismatches than they get.
Gesell, Clemmons, Jok, Uthoff, Woodbury
Anytime Woodbury sits, presumption #2 of Jones backing him up, we have a chance at a scary lineup offensively with a stretch four and a stretch five. Opposing teams will have to bring their post defenders out or leave us open somewhere.
It also explains the amount of wings we recruited as, presumption #3 Williams learns the point and now we've got Ellingson, Fleming and Moss competing for playing time at the two and three, and presumption #4 Hutton is a Michigan like three/four in the mold of Glenn Robinson III and Zak Irvin (I've seen talk that the 6'6" 215 lb Irvin will start at the four).
We'll also have competition from Uhl, Wagner and Baer for time at the three/four.
It is easy to see where the three ball, dribble drive, and quicker athletes crashing the boards could all be part of what McCaffery has described as a "different team". And playing time for the newbies becomes a matter of earning the spot over other newbies.
If we remove Clemmons and put Jok and Uthoff where they were last year, the four and five become thin, and there is a bottleneck at the wings. I don't think that was the intention. I think as late as before we offered Jones the only difference was we'd have liked to have landed another post player. We just didn't find one at the talent level we require.
I think, we're very close to the preferred lineups McCaffery wants to go with of:
pg, sg, sf, pf, c alternating with pg, sg, sf, sf, pf lineups.
If we had intention to play bigger, I think we'd have seen times when Olaseni was at the pf, instead we saw Uhl take those minutes.
Another reason I can think of that might make sense of these opinions, we're actively recruiting a big to replace Woody, and we've got Pemsl to take Uthoff's spot. But with the remaining two scholarships we're after a point guard and clearly the last scholarship could go to just about any position. I'm inclined to believe that pf, c at all times idea would require two c's and a pf...than why be offering players like Santos?
I like it, make teams match up to us, or get more out of the mismatches than they get.
I like the small ball lineup in theory because it works for the Warriors but they are an NBA TEAM and it isn't effective if you can't shoot the ball well. As we have seen with Iowa, they don't have any reliable shooters except maybe JU. It's not like Iowa is going to all of a sudden be a lethal shooting team. Fully expect more cold nights than hot nights because it's always been like that. Iowa has maybe 2 pure shooters on this team right now in Jok and Uthoff, regardless of Fran's hyperbole. Ellingson and Flemming haven't proven anything on a collegiate level and can't be depended on. He said Oglesby "was the best shooter he's ever coached" after all.
It seems like the NBA now favors have 6'3"+ PGs, 6'6" SGs, 6'8" SFs and 6'9"+PFs with few 6'11" + Centers. The speed game of the NBA is coming to the NCAAs quicker and spacing of multiple arc shooters is going to be the norm. Fewer back to the basket players as most players are now the catch and shoot or dribble drive. The shorter game clock in the college arena is going to favor the quick transition game. The Todd Lickliter/ Dick Bennett gameship is for high schools and lower divisions. Thanks, Gary Barta.
I understand ryno99's wait and see attitude. Yes, Uthoff and Jok were the only legitimate 3 point threats. Last year's team lacked a guard who could knock down anything beyond 17 feet.
It was very frustrating to watch a major college team so bereft of outside shooting, especially early last season, and particularly when UNI could roll out 7 guys capable from behind the arc. I would expect the stats would bear out my impression that Ogelsby got worse as a shooter with each successive year. His confidence level certainly deteriorated in years 3 and 4. My theory is, shooting is all about fluidity of motion. The stronger and heavier Ogelsby got, the lower his shooting percentage. He did improve as a rebounder and passer and defender, but his role was to knock down shots, and when he was open with the ball and 5 seconds left in the shot clock but began passing off, Iowa effectively had no "designated shooter."
I'll never forget what Mac McCausland said about his son, Kent, "When you can't dribble, rebound, pass or defend, you better be making shots."
Yes, replacing White's productivity in his 31 minutes a game won't happen from one individual, but improving upon Ogelsby's 18 minutes shouldn't be hard, and what's made up there can go to the White shortage.
Gesell is a good shooter, but a weak elbow forced him to always step inside the 3 point line and take a long, two. I doubt the elbow issue is chronic. I expect him to be a three point threat this season. Another reason to watch the PTL.
Ellingson may not be the passer/rebounder/defender Ogelsby was, but he's going to let it fly with abandon. So will, Fleming. Yes, they haven't done it in the bright lights, but they won't have the mental block of last year's senior shooting guard. Fleming played a national schedule last year for the best prep team in the country. His last 2 games were in Madison Square Garden. He's already been away from home for a year. He's not the average incoming Freshman. The Iowa coaching staff would be surprised if he became a shrinking violet. So will I.
As I said before, Jone's 99 made treys infers he'll be deadly from 15-18. Clemmons showed moxie with 3 treys vs Gonzaga, and enters 2015/16 with confidence. Uhl is still more of a slasher, but will improve, and one's shots tend to go in when you see teammates' going in.
Iowa may not be a "lethal shooting team" this year, but compared to last year, the Hawks sure as hell will be.
Final thought, remember the first year of the 3 point line, '86-87? Early adopters who embraced it were ahead of the game, and it took a while for established programs to catch up. Rick Pitino was a nobody until his Providence team made the Final 4 that year. When he explained the 34 percent from 3 vs 50 percent from 2 theory, conventional wisdom did a 180.
The new rules aren't official yet, and its going to be a full season before we really know what's the best skill set, and strategies to employ. It's going to be fun to watch it all sort itself out across the country. It would be foolhardy in May to guarantee positive things in March for Fran and the Hawks, but, in a year that will have the most and biggest rule changes in over 25 years, going against the traditional Big Ten grain with a sleek style could be serendipitous.
It was very frustrating to watch a major college team so bereft of outside shooting, especially early last season, and particularly when UNI could roll out 7 guys capable from behind the arc. I would expect the stats would bear out my impression that Ogelsby got worse as a shooter with each successive year. His confidence level certainly deteriorated in years 3 and 4. My theory is, shooting is all about fluidity of motion. The stronger and heavier Ogelsby got, the lower his shooting percentage. He did improve as a rebounder and passer and defender, but his role was to knock down shots, and when he was open with the ball and 5 seconds left in the shot clock but began passing off, Iowa effectively had no "designated shooter."
I'll never forget what Mac McCausland said about his son, Kent, "When you can't dribble, rebound, pass or defend, you better be making shots."
Yes, replacing White's productivity in his 31 minutes a game won't happen from one individual, but improving upon Ogelsby's 18 minutes shouldn't be hard, and what's made up there can go to the White shortage.
Gesell is a good shooter, but a weak elbow forced him to always step inside the 3 point line and take a long, two. I doubt the elbow issue is chronic. I expect him to be a three point threat this season. Another reason to watch the PTL.
Ellingson may not be the passer/rebounder/defender Ogelsby was, but he's going to let it fly with abandon. So will, Fleming. Yes, they haven't done it in the bright lights, but they won't have the mental block of last year's senior shooting guard. Fleming played a national schedule last year for the best prep team in the country. His last 2 games were in Madison Square Garden. He's already been away from home for a year. He's not the average incoming Freshman. The Iowa coaching staff would be surprised if he became a shrinking violet. So will I.
As I said before, Jone's 99 made treys infers he'll be deadly from 15-18. Clemmons showed moxie with 3 treys vs Gonzaga, and enters 2015/16 with confidence. Uhl is still more of a slasher, but will improve, and one's shots tend to go in when you see teammates' going in.
Iowa may not be a "lethal shooting team" this year, but compared to last year, the Hawks sure as hell will be.
Final thought, remember the first year of the 3 point line, '86-87? Early adopters who embraced it were ahead of the game, and it took a while for established programs to catch up. Rick Pitino was a nobody until his Providence team made the Final 4 that year. When he explained the 34 percent from 3 vs 50 percent from 2 theory, conventional wisdom did a 180.
The new rules aren't official yet, and its going to be a full season before we really know what's the best skill set, and strategies to employ. It's going to be fun to watch it all sort itself out across the country. It would be foolhardy in May to guarantee positive things in March for Fran and the Hawks, but, in a year that will have the most and biggest rule changes in over 25 years, going against the traditional Big Ten grain with a sleek style could be serendipitous.
The board had the same concerns following the 2012/13 season when it seemed we couldn't hit a barn wall from inside the barn. .419 and .305 were terrible. We lost one player at the end of the season, May. Going into the 2013/14 season it was a chore to defend my position that our shooting was going to improve. Yet we shot .453 and .350 which is a pretty good percentage.
I'll predict confidently that the same turnaround will happen in 2015/16 where we'll see good improvement over the .431 and .333 we shot this year. Reason, that percentage went up, up and more up from the terrible start we had in the nonconference.
The concerns aren't shooting. They are maintaining our defense and replacing the trips to the free throw line that we're going to lose with White and Olaseni gone. Two guys that took over half our free throws and hit them at a combined 80% clip while the rest of the team shot just 70%.
I'll predict confidently that the same turnaround will happen in 2015/16 where we'll see good improvement over the .431 and .333 we shot this year. Reason, that percentage went up, up and more up from the terrible start we had in the nonconference.
The concerns aren't shooting. They are maintaining our defense and replacing the trips to the free throw line that we're going to lose with White and Olaseni gone. Two guys that took over half our free throws and hit them at a combined 80% clip while the rest of the team shot just 70%.
I don't see Utoff playing an inside position on offense, but I could see him playing the 5 on defense next yearwhen Woody us on the bench. His long arms make him defend like a 7 footer, he just needs a little more weight to keep from getting completely shoved aside.
I think you are correct in that Uthoff could man the 5 just as well as Jones/Uhl/Wagner but I doubt if we see it much. JU is going to be the #1 offensive option and I don't think Fran is going to want to chance getting JU into foul trouble...manning the 5 against any kind of legit center will open him up for that. We may see it in spots but I think it'll be rare.
LOL. I really hope this is sarcasm. The softess kid on Iowa playing D against the bigs in the BIG? Cmon.
Look at the roster. JU playing the 5 at times is going to happen. That's why he's trying to gain weight right now. Remember, the "softness kid" is going to be our best shot-blocker and rebounder, in addition to leading scorer. When we're going against heavyweights, we'll probably play zone, maybe even with Woody in the game.
I'm thinking more in a zone than man defense, which he actually was doing this year from time to time.
Just to clarify, I'm guessing at the five guys that walk on the court for the first scrimmage of the first practice, and when the tip off of the first exhibition game happens. That, simply because we'll need to see what the young guns bring in a game.
You guys are funny. We take the best available player at times because they are the only players. Don't get me wrong, I love what Fran has done at Iowa and he has turned us back into a competitive program. If Fran could have gotten another Olesani then he would have done it. Dale Jones literally had no other offers coming out of JUCO. Our best bet is that he is a serviceable player and that's it. Can you seriously see him going up against some of the bigs in this league? We are going to get manhandled at times next year. I hope we can figure out a rotation but you guys are hilarious if you think there isn't going to be a significant drop off with going to a JUCO forward or an undersized Freshman in the post and neither had any other power 5 offers. I like our core group next year but anything outside of that is a complete crapshoot.
My opinion, I think Iowa is always going to be a work in progress. It's just how we're currently built.
What would change that (will change that?) is if/when we pull a/some nationally recognized talent that other Big 5s are after. (McCafferys, Weiskamp, perhaps?)
And before some of you get worked up into a lather, I completely appreciate the efforts of all of the usual suspects we've graduated. The Whites and Marbles and Gatens have all been fully appreciated by myself. But they were more the under the radar type of recruit. If you want to shake things up, go head to head with some of the big boys and wrangle someone to put a stamp on this thing.
I'm not going to lose sleep waiting for it to happen. I love what we have and love watching our under the radar talent develop and reward our patience. Last year broke the mold for what we've been waiting for....and there's still plenty of room to grow!
If we look back at all of our losses last year, they all taught us something about what we could use to be better. Northwestern's, passion, Gonzaga's talent, Wisconsin's pinpoint execution...and talent....twice, Penn State's fearlessness....
Why are Wisconsin and MSU always at the top of the conference? Can we be those teams? Can we get to where they've lived? We need some transcendent talent. In the meantime, I'll enjoy what we have.
What would change that (will change that?) is if/when we pull a/some nationally recognized talent that other Big 5s are after. (McCafferys, Weiskamp, perhaps?)
And before some of you get worked up into a lather, I completely appreciate the efforts of all of the usual suspects we've graduated. The Whites and Marbles and Gatens have all been fully appreciated by myself. But they were more the under the radar type of recruit. If you want to shake things up, go head to head with some of the big boys and wrangle someone to put a stamp on this thing.
I'm not going to lose sleep waiting for it to happen. I love what we have and love watching our under the radar talent develop and reward our patience. Last year broke the mold for what we've been waiting for....and there's still plenty of room to grow!
If we look back at all of our losses last year, they all taught us something about what we could use to be better. Northwestern's, passion, Gonzaga's talent, Wisconsin's pinpoint execution...and talent....twice, Penn State's fearlessness....
Why are Wisconsin and MSU always at the top of the conference? Can we be those teams? Can we get to where they've lived? We need some transcendent talent. In the meantime, I'll enjoy what we have.
It's interesting that you bring up Olaseni. When he was first recruited, who would have thought he would turn out to be the player he would be? Fran has been recruiting Jones since HS, and he had that injury his freshman year. Both factors could have something to do with a lack of hard offers now. Fran chose Jones over pursuing a real center and you know Fran isn't lazy about recruiting. It's a choice that could have consequences on his job performance. He's earned the benefit of assuming something is there with Jones as a shooting PF.
As for Wagner, he seems to be a Basabe-type player. To me, his freshman contributions seem less certain but I am encouraged that one of the things he stated as a big factor in his recruitment is Fran's player development reputation. He wants to work, and I like what he brings to the table to be developed under Fran.
I am not nearly as pessimistic as Hawks2405, but we are clearly a big man short going into next season. It will be interesting to see how the coaches compensate. Golden State is not a good example of the merits of small ball, because they have the best backcourt on the planet and maybe the best shooter ever. I think the IU team last year is a good example of what is more likely to happen in the B1G when you don't always have a post presence on defense.
Let's revisit this after Iowa gets into the B1G season. I think you will have a slightly different opinion of Mr. Jones. And although he did not have other listed major college offers, per his coach he would have if Iowa had not been involved.
I find it comical how some people know the future. Maryland had some troubles and player losses coming into last season and almost won the big ten. It is impossible to know what the Iowa team will be like with so many new players coming in. IMPOSSIBLE. There are 3 seniors who need to kick it up a notch and be consistent every game, will they? Theres another senior who could possibly be the leading scorer, will he? There's a junior who needs to kick it up a notch, will he? There's a sophmore who needs to be aware of his increased role, will he? Then there are 6 new players and 2 redshirts who have not shown anybody what they have as a college player. Put all that and other things together(team chemistry etc) and it is impossible to know how good this team will be.
"Let's revisit this after Iowa gets into the B1G season." BB's right. We could go around and around until Iowa plays some basketball, we'll just end up spinning our wheels. But, on the other hand isn't that what the summer is for? 
So, carry on.
Even the laughing at others, 2405. Just remember what comes around goes around.
So, carry on. Even the laughing at others, 2405. Just remember what comes around goes around.
I'm laughing at "literally had no other offers coming out of JUCO"....you don't know that...do you? From everything I've heard...his JUCO coach does not allow visits during the BB season..once their season was over..numerous schools came calling...but Fran had all but sealed the deal...
you are also wrong about Wagner power 5 offers...so some of us may be funny...but you could at least try to be accurate....ISU has won back-back conference tournaments...take a look at their height...
every year is a crapshoot...its May. Some fans have been wanting Iowa to get more athletes...Fran does just that..now their not tall enough...damn if you do damn if you don't....that's funny...and typical.
Hey, Dale Jones update. Met a guy, through his wife and quite by accident, that officiated JUCO level last couple of years. Said did "a few" of Dale Jones game. Swore me not to rat out his name, so I won't.
Anyway, story on Jones is he's a "nice player". "Good shooter" that doesn't draw a lot of fouls. My life saving ref (cuz I was in a BORING event) said he always checks the box scores after games for anything that stands out and then said that he noticed that Jones had more rebounds than it seemed like he had during the games. I asked what he thought of the rebounding and the guy said it probably means Jones picks up more than his share of long rebounds. I asked if he thought Jones was physical. He said didn't seem so. Also said plays Jones plays defense like most JUCO guys...being no expert myself on JUCO ball I pretended to know what he meant but I don't think it was complimentary.
Just a blip of information. Although our post situation seems still worrisome, and perhaps more so now you also cannot have too many good shooters.
Anyway, story on Jones is he's a "nice player". "Good shooter" that doesn't draw a lot of fouls. My life saving ref (cuz I was in a BORING event) said he always checks the box scores after games for anything that stands out and then said that he noticed that Jones had more rebounds than it seemed like he had during the games. I asked what he thought of the rebounding and the guy said it probably means Jones picks up more than his share of long rebounds. I asked if he thought Jones was physical. He said didn't seem so. Also said plays Jones plays defense like most JUCO guys...being no expert myself on JUCO ball I pretended to know what he meant but I don't think it was complimentary.
Just a blip of information. Although our post situation seems still worrisome, and perhaps more so now you also cannot have too many good shooters.
There's very few "5s" with any low post game in this conference. Most of them are there just to set screens and rebound.
Yeah he might get pushed around a little but overall it will be harder for 5s to guard him than vice versa.
I can almost guarantee you will see JU playing spot minutes at the 5 next year.
If you don't think there were other power 5 schools interested in a 6'8 guy who made 99 3s at a 45% clip, you are insane.
Those numbers are ridiculous.
If the guy had absolutely no other talents there would still be plenty of p5 schools willing to take him.
I was a little harsh but I will stick to my main points. Look at what happened with Dickerson? He had more offers than Jones and it was a total bust. Just because we want to be excited doesn't make these JUCO guys a good fit or mean that they are capable of playing at this level. If another team is interested in a guy then they are going to offer regardless if Iowa has him "locked down" so I don't buy that reasoning. I am not aware of any other high major offers and I feel like this is a real reach. I think Fran basically struck out on finding another big guy. From everything I have read, Jones is an outside shooter and finesse player. He's not a post player. Wagner did have other offers so I misspoke there. I'm excited about his potential but he's going to need time to develop. It's not very often that a true freshman will be able to defend down low in this conference. Hopefully Woody can stay out of foul trouble and we can go zone and use our length when he is out of the game.
Last edited:
Guess well see.
Fran went out of his way to say that DJ was better than getting another big. He could have gotten the big guy that was on the same team but went Jones instead.
There was no reason to bring in a guy like this unless they see him contributing.
Just because Dickerson flaked means nothing. He had talent.
JUCO recruiting is a different animal. Coaches spend the majority of their resources recruiting high schoolers.
Fran went out of his way to say that DJ was better than getting another big. He could have gotten the big guy that was on the same team but went Jones instead.
There was no reason to bring in a guy like this unless they see him contributing.
Just because Dickerson flaked means nothing. He had talent.
JUCO recruiting is a different animal. Coaches spend the majority of their resources recruiting high schoolers.
IMO, the PG position is a real crap shoot particularly when talking about a sub 6 foot player. Also lots depend on decision making. That's hard to project. I think TD would have been a good player by end of next year and start of 3rd yr.
A 6'9 athlete is much more projectable IMO.
I don't disagree with what you wrote but it kind of highlights a point I've been making for months, that Iowa is not attacking the market inefficiency in recruiting. Forget trying to beat out Mich/OSU for the best athletes. Give me guys who can shoot the lights out and target undersized PG's who can play. Much easier to get a quick, quality undersized PG, than recruit some 6'4" PG whom every major school is after. It's why Fran was almost able to land Ulis. He needs to keep with this approach, the market inefficiency.
The other market inefficiency is shooters. Yes, it is possible to recruit excellent shooters who teams like Ky aren't drooling all over. A perfect is example is thee Stephen Curry. Not a single major conference school offered him a scholarship, and Curry was the son of former NBA player Del Curry. Even Va Tech, Del's alumni, wouldn't offer Stephen a scholarship, but wanted him to walk-on.
Iowa is never going to recruit the athletes that OSU/Mich/MSU/Indiana/etc can recruit. Don't try or rather focus in on a different type of athlete. Find guys who might be studs, but a little undersized, so the big schools are scared off, or guys who can shoot lights out from beyond the arc. This is where the market inefficiency is and where Iowa could exploit this inefficiency and put teams that can compete for the B1G, much like Wis competes for the B1G championship most every year.
There is really no way of knowing this, as the only way anyone outside of the athletic dept (and they can't talk about anyone who hasn't signed) knows about offers is getting that info from either the recruit or his coach/family/etc. It sounded like Jones knew what he wanted and when others expressed interest he said "no thanks", where TD liked the limelight a bit more and you could imagine you were going to hear about every offer he had. Seem like 2 completely different kids.
As to what any of that means to how Jones will perform/contribute, zippo. I really don't have any expectations there, more a wait and see attitude.
Of course you might be right but I don't think we know enough right now to say Ellingson and Flemming "can't be depended upon". To the contrary I think we assume they come in as bullseye artists ready to contribute in a meaningful way. Unless they don't, in which case your statement would be accurate.
Dickerson was recruited because of the struggles that Sapp had in his sophomore year...had Fran had a crystal ball to know how Sapp was going to play last year...he may not have offered Dickerson at all. It is not my intention to bash Dickerson...regardless of how he played in non-conference. I was disappointed he quit the team. Quit....before the season ended. I found that to say a lot about the person...me mine & me.
The strength & backbone of Iowa's program lies with Fran's high school recruiting, player development, 4 year players...it brings stability with at least some degree of experience...
None of us know the impact Dale Jones will have next year....its all speculation until the real show come fall. What we no longer have to speculate about is Fran's ability to spot talent ...he has proven that. Comparing Dickerson to Jones is meaningless...just because it didn't work out for one player doesn't mean it wont for another.
None of us know what other schools came calling after Jones JUCO season ended. You can believe the comments made by his JUCO coach or not. I don't think getting Jones was a reach by any means...
All I know is everyone of Iowa's 13 scholarship players has talent ...they all bring something to the table.. of the 6 newcomers..Uhl & Ellingson..its a matter of who can utilize their talents for the good of the team the quickest...to me this is what makes Iowa BB great to follow..
The strength & backbone of Iowa's program lies with Fran's high school recruiting, player development, 4 year players...it brings stability with at least some degree of experience...
None of us know the impact Dale Jones will have next year....its all speculation until the real show come fall. What we no longer have to speculate about is Fran's ability to spot talent ...he has proven that. Comparing Dickerson to Jones is meaningless...just because it didn't work out for one player doesn't mean it wont for another.
None of us know what other schools came calling after Jones JUCO season ended. You can believe the comments made by his JUCO coach or not. I don't think getting Jones was a reach by any means...
All I know is everyone of Iowa's 13 scholarship players has talent ...they all bring something to the table.. of the 6 newcomers..Uhl & Ellingson..its a matter of who can utilize their talents for the good of the team the quickest...to me this is what makes Iowa BB great to follow..
MSU has been at the Top 20 years and Wisconsin has been up at the top for 15 years. Those programs have 2 things in common: great coaches. Whether you like Izzo or Bo Ryan or not, that fact is indisputable. Both coaches have been successful despite changes in the game, graduations, assistant coaches leaving etc.
Wisconsin is the model Iowa should aim for because it doesn't rely on recruiting blue chips. Iowa might land a blue chip here and there but will never make a living off of it. Wisconsin has built a program where it doesn't matter who they land in recruiting because Bo coaches them up. The quality of player has steadily inched up year by year for Wisconsin however. That is what Iowa needs to establish. Success on the court and then steadily inch up in the caliber of player
