I'm still wondering if I know you. Either way, you've done a great job describing the assets of young Mr. Baer.
Baer, the 8th Spaghetti Noodle
- Thread starter 1BigGalloot
- Start date
...your post is spot on...very nice young man...considering Fran has recruited a lot of wings (or potential wings) there will be a lot of competition for PT...I would not put it past that Baer makes' an impact....not quite ready to put him in Bowens' category... but it will be interesting to see how things pan out...he certainly isn't your run of the mill walkon.
Haha. That is exactly how I describe him. He was fun. That 94-95 team didn't win enough but they were a blast to watch.
Can this kid shoot when facing the basket? That skill alone should/can earn PT on the Iowa squad. You figure about four guys are going to play at the two forward positions, at least until the stretch run. Right now Baer has at least practiced against B1G players. I agree that he is one walk on that could earn time.
He is quicker than you think. I know him well and he is a great kid. The comparisons to Ryan Bowen make sense.
I can think of 3 former walk-on's that got a lot of attention (buzz)...
Luke Recker
Sam Okey
Kyle Galloway
Luke Recker may have been a technical walk on, but he was on scholarship with Knight at Indiana, and Lute at Arizona, and I'm sure he got put on scholarship at Iowa once he got here.
No, he was not eligible for a scholarship unless he sat out 2 years (old big ten rule). Didn't hurt that his dad lived in Washington, IA at the time so he at least got instate tuition.
Pretty sure Luke Recker and Sam Okey - both High School All-Americans - aren't the type of walk-ons Galoot was referring to.
Point taken, but I'll stand on my Kyle Galloway reference... not only was he discussed/hyped, he produced as well.
Not many walk-on's put up 30 points in a game
Too funny. Only days after I compare Baer to Ryan Bowen on a thread on May 8th, assistant coach Andrew Francis does the same in his podcast with Tom Kakert. Fast forward to the 1:16 mark in the link, below. Coach Francis spends 80 seconds on Baer. Not sure what the "Baer Cage" is, but I suppose it means he's been playing some lock down D against the first teamers in practice. Sounds like if the Hawks need an energy spark, Fran might be calling on him.
https://iowa.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1765759
When a staff can have a non-scholarship player to point to from an energy level, and if he gets time ahead of some scholarship kids, it's going to raise everybody's game. That will be leadership, from the bottom of the totem pole, up.
I'm going on record now, in mid May, in anticipation of November/December. If Baer gets floor time, early, it's not an indictment of the recruiting class. It's a reflection of his basketball I.Q. Fran already said grasping and understanding where to be and what's being done on both ends of the floor will be what decides playing time early for the Freshman.
If Baer averages an appearance each half in games before Christmas, kind of like Uhl last year, it will be apparent he's a lock for the scholarship Uthof is departing. Pemsl already has one. Iowa will get another point guard, and another banger.
https://iowa.rivals.com/content.asp?CID=1765759
When a staff can have a non-scholarship player to point to from an energy level, and if he gets time ahead of some scholarship kids, it's going to raise everybody's game. That will be leadership, from the bottom of the totem pole, up.
I'm going on record now, in mid May, in anticipation of November/December. If Baer gets floor time, early, it's not an indictment of the recruiting class. It's a reflection of his basketball I.Q. Fran already said grasping and understanding where to be and what's being done on both ends of the floor will be what decides playing time early for the Freshman.
If Baer averages an appearance each half in games before Christmas, kind of like Uhl last year, it will be apparent he's a lock for the scholarship Uthof is departing. Pemsl already has one. Iowa will get another point guard, and another banger.
You're not really serious with the Recker and Okey thing are you? No offense to Baer but he is (was) a freshman walk on. Okey I believe was a McD all American and Recker was right up there. They were transfers. Let's actually see the kid get on the floor before we start anointing him.
Wondergrape was right. When 2432Hawk came up with Recker and Okey and Galloway, those were 3 players I never considered as walk ons. Baer was never the high school player Recker and Okey, were. If Galloway was a 2 time All Stater, he has Baer beat.
Anybody following the thread knows 2432Hawk was not comparing Baer to them, nor was I. My point was never to anoint him anything. Just to point out that he'll likely get a scholarship, and likely for more than just a year, which would mean he's more than the Stokes/Denning variety. This is good news for Hawk fans, since, if Baer gets more than scrub time minutes this year, it means this team essentially has 14 scholarship quality players.
littlez, I agree with you. Let's see him play, which was my whole point. Watch him in PrimeTime this summer. I have no idea how he compares to Jones, Wagner, Fleming, Hutton, Moss, and Williams. I've seen Baer play. I haven't seen them.
The Register's Rick Brown called Baer a "sleeper pick" to get in the rotation, and the fact Tom Kakert asked Coach Francis if Baer could find a role, and coach said he thought he could, means the staff has trained the media to not be surprised to see Baer on the floor.
I'm too lazy to look up Okey's Iowa and college career numbers. There are no McDonald's All Americans on Iowa's current roster, yet, I'd hazard a guess Woodbury, Gesell and Uthoff have already been more productive, and Clemmons and Jok will surely be after this season. I'd bet there have been thousands non McDonald's All American collegians that have had better career D1 stats than Okey since he finished, and Hawk fans better hope at least 5 of the newbies surpass him, too, or this class is a bust. That's why recruiting is such a crap shoot. It takes a lot more than just 5 stars next to your name to be a solid and reliable college player.
I don't think any of the incoming six players are higher than 3 stars, which is why early pre-season prognosticators have a team with 5 returnees with starting experience only rated in the middle of the Big Ten. The media gets caught up in recruiting, and puts too much stock in goofy ratings. Iowa's strength will be its numbers, and chemistry is the key anyway. Just imagine the problem this team would have if it had a one and doner joining all the veterans. Better to have a bunch of eager players willing to do all they can to help you win, and anything they do is gravy, rather than somebody expecting the world and the offense to revolve around them.
That's what I'm here for.
I think people forget how much of a stud Okey was his first 2 years at Wisconsin.
To claim that any of the Iowa players mentioned have been more productive is, well, ridiculous. Especially when you take into account the # of games played by each.
WISCONSIN
1995-1996 led Wisconsin in scoring (13.2), rebounding (6.8), assists (3.1) and blocks (1.3).
1996-1997 11.2 PPG, 8.5 RPG, 2.9 APG, 0.9 BPG.
1997-1998 (9 games) 9.8 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 2.6 APG, 0.6 BPG.
IOWA
1998-1999 (7 games) 6.6 PPG, 3.1 RPG, 1.1 APG, 0.4 BPG
Career
Games: 75
Points: 859
Rebounds: 514
Assists: 208
Blocks: 74
Here is what the 5 Iowa players you cited have done:
Adam W (105 games):
Points: 600
Rebounds: 487
Assists: 79
Blocks: 61
Mike G (101 games):
Points: 805
Rebounds: 221
Assists: 352
Blocks: 19
Jarod U (67 games):
Points: 674
Rebounds: 370
Assists: 85
Blocks: 91
Peter J (61 games):
Points: 358
Rebounds: 113
Assists: 63
Blocks: 7
Anthony C (104 games):
Points: 406
Rebounds: 169
Assists: 223
Blocks: 13
Legend12, Thanks for the smiley face, and the numbers. It's good to see the stats in one spot. They also support the general perception of Okey from 15-20 years away - A meteor who accomplished very little in his last two years, especially the last in Iowa City. I suppose it's how one defines "productivity." Dividing stats per minutes on the floor is obviously a legitimate measure, and one that favors Okey as the numbers point out. Another is availability for your team. 16 games total in the last 2 seasons, almost all non-conference games I imagine, means Okey was essentially useless his last two years.
Woodbury, Gesell, and Clemons will double the number of games Okey played when their careers are over. While stats are useful, they don't tell everything. Defense is certainly more than block shots and steals (steals weren't included), and half the game is played on the defensive end. It's not easy to evaluate one's overall defensive effectiveness via a stat sheet, especially if your team plays quite a bit of zone. So, games played adds a definite value since you are available to stop your opponent, but one that isn't easy to measure.
So, yes, even if you give "productivity points" to my aforementioned current Hawkeyes for games played, I'll grant you I spoke out of turn by saying they have already been more productive than Okey. However, I'd posit they've already been more VALUABLE, and by seasons end will dwarf Okey in that regard.
Gesell is on pace to have twice as many assists plus 50, will be a thousand point scorer who outscores Okey by 200, and will have doubled him in games played, which has a hidden defensive value, as well as leadership.
Woodbury will surpass Okey in rebounds and blocks, and double in games played.
Uthoff will edge Okey in points and rebounds and play in more than 25 games.
Playing more games means you were a part of more wins. I'd imagine Clemmons, Gesell and Woodbury have already accumulated twice as many Big Ten victories as Okey, and a significantly higher number of overall wins, with still a season to go. Uthoff, not as many yet as his 3 teammates, but already more than Okey, with more to come.
As yourself, which careers do coaches value, more - Steady reliable productivity and playing in every game, especially conference games over 4 years; or, super charged to start, but basically 2 1/2 seasons over 4, and only 2 in conference? Toss in the value of graduating (may not have been as important in Okey's day, but he definitely didn't help Wisconsin in that regard, and, does anyone know, did Okey graduate from Iowa?)
Timing is everything, as I said earlier regarding Baer's high school development. If Okey's timing were reversed, and his last years were his first, say maybe due to an injury like Elingson, or late development like Bartels (see how I used Wisconsin preps?, he'd be considered a god with 2 monster seasons at the end. Instead, furthering the Wisconsin narrative with a Miller Beer comparison, unfortunately Okey's career isn't "Tastes Great," but rather "Less Filling."
Not arguing with you Legend12. I think this shows the numbers can be used to make both of our points. Yes, Okey was a man child. Sadly, his last two years makes it easy to forget.
I suppose it depends though how one defines productivity. Now, if I had said, "I'd hazard a guess Woodbury, Gesell and Uthoff have already proven to be more valuable," I imagine few Hawkeye fans would debate. And if the sentence were, "When career numbers are eventually matched side by side, Woodbury, Gesell, and Uthoff will prove to be more valuable," even fewer will take issue.
Thanks for the numbers and the chance to put in perspective.
Woodbury, Gesell, and Clemons will double the number of games Okey played when their careers are over. While stats are useful, they don't tell everything. Defense is certainly more than block shots and steals (steals weren't included), and half the game is played on the defensive end. It's not easy to evaluate one's overall defensive effectiveness via a stat sheet, especially if your team plays quite a bit of zone. So, games played adds a definite value since you are available to stop your opponent, but one that isn't easy to measure.
So, yes, even if you give "productivity points" to my aforementioned current Hawkeyes for games played, I'll grant you I spoke out of turn by saying they have already been more productive than Okey. However, I'd posit they've already been more VALUABLE, and by seasons end will dwarf Okey in that regard.
Gesell is on pace to have twice as many assists plus 50, will be a thousand point scorer who outscores Okey by 200, and will have doubled him in games played, which has a hidden defensive value, as well as leadership.
Woodbury will surpass Okey in rebounds and blocks, and double in games played.
Uthoff will edge Okey in points and rebounds and play in more than 25 games.
Playing more games means you were a part of more wins. I'd imagine Clemmons, Gesell and Woodbury have already accumulated twice as many Big Ten victories as Okey, and a significantly higher number of overall wins, with still a season to go. Uthoff, not as many yet as his 3 teammates, but already more than Okey, with more to come.
As yourself, which careers do coaches value, more - Steady reliable productivity and playing in every game, especially conference games over 4 years; or, super charged to start, but basically 2 1/2 seasons over 4, and only 2 in conference? Toss in the value of graduating (may not have been as important in Okey's day, but he definitely didn't help Wisconsin in that regard, and, does anyone know, did Okey graduate from Iowa?)
Timing is everything, as I said earlier regarding Baer's high school development. If Okey's timing were reversed, and his last years were his first, say maybe due to an injury like Elingson, or late development like Bartels (see how I used Wisconsin preps?
, he'd be considered a god with 2 monster seasons at the end. Instead, furthering the Wisconsin narrative with a Miller Beer comparison, unfortunately Okey's career isn't "Tastes Great," but rather "Less Filling."Not arguing with you Legend12. I think this shows the numbers can be used to make both of our points. Yes, Okey was a man child. Sadly, his last two years makes it easy to forget.
I suppose it depends though how one defines productivity. Now, if I had said, "I'd hazard a guess Woodbury, Gesell and Uthoff have already proven to be more valuable," I imagine few Hawkeye fans would debate. And if the sentence were, "When career numbers are eventually matched side by side, Woodbury, Gesell, and Uthoff will prove to be more valuable," even fewer will take issue.
Thanks for the numbers and the chance to put in perspective.
Similar threads
