Davidson vs. Goliath
- Thread starter ChiHawk1985
- Start date
Article ignores the fact that ISU has probably 4+ players who are better than anyone Davidson has. Also, Iowa faced smaller lineups against Indiana, Michigan, Maryland, Nebraska, OSU and a host of non conf teams and looked good.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
Posted from Rivals Mobile
We can and will. The size mismatch favors us, not them despite what these talking heads are saying.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
I get why Davidsons style of play could give Iowa problems but Niang and Morris won't be suiting up for Davidson. As long as Davidson doesn't shoot out of their minds I think Iowa wins and somewhat comfortably.
This post was edited on 3/18 4:20 PM by TheBling
No reason to change. Can't change much, anyway. When the object of a game is to put a spherical object through a horizonal ring that is 10' off the floor, height should matter. Doesn't mean shorter teams don't win. But if the taller team has equal talent and equal will, they should win. If I had a limbo team, I'd recruit short people. Penetrate and dish, lob, pull up for medium jumpers and be ready to rebound. On defense, protect rim with just one or two, and pressure 3-point shooters. If they shoot lights out with hands in their face, congrats! to them. But the inside is still a higher percentage shot and I'd take those odds.
There's no question, this game is not a "given" but I think articles like this overstate the case of "slow plodding Goliath against speedy sharp-shooting Davidson." They also only look at one side of the story...
I agree with the poster above who says, comparing Iowa State's line up change to what Iowa will face in Davidson on Friday is a serious stretch. BUT if they want to do analysis like that, let's do it both ways. Davidson played four ranked teams (ranked when they played): UNC #6, Virginia #3, VCU (at VCU #20), and Dayton #22.
UNC - Neutral Court - 90-72 Davidson shot 34% from 3; 31% overall and committed 18 fouls. UNC started 6-9, 6-9, 6-5, 6-8, and 6-1
UVA - Away - 83-72 Davidson shot 39% from 3; 48% overall and committed 19 fouls. UVA started 6-8, 6-11, 6-6, 6-5, and 6-2
VCU - Away 71-65 Davidson shot 36% from 3; 37% overall and committed 15 fouls. VCU started 6-6, 6-5, 6-3, 6-2, 6-6
Dayton - Home 77-60 Davidson shot 52% from 3; 49% overall and committed 20 fouls. Dayton started 6-6, 6-6, 6-4, 6-0, and 6-2
Notably, Davidson does not shoot as well away from home and they foul a bit. Size didn't seem to kill UNC or UVA. I'm not saying Iowa is UNC or UVA, but Davidson is no Iowa State either. Lets not forget they are likely to be on the receiving end of some "in your face" dunks WITH our size advantage. I'm not saying that an Iowa win is a "given" but Davidson isn't the world-beaters that some in the press (like the referenced article) are making them out to be either.
This post was edited on 3/18 4:22 PM by michael65
I agree with the poster above who says, comparing Iowa State's line up change to what Iowa will face in Davidson on Friday is a serious stretch. BUT if they want to do analysis like that, let's do it both ways. Davidson played four ranked teams (ranked when they played): UNC #6, Virginia #3, VCU (at VCU #20), and Dayton #22.
UNC - Neutral Court - 90-72 Davidson shot 34% from 3; 31% overall and committed 18 fouls. UNC started 6-9, 6-9, 6-5, 6-8, and 6-1
UVA - Away - 83-72 Davidson shot 39% from 3; 48% overall and committed 19 fouls. UVA started 6-8, 6-11, 6-6, 6-5, and 6-2
VCU - Away 71-65 Davidson shot 36% from 3; 37% overall and committed 15 fouls. VCU started 6-6, 6-5, 6-3, 6-2, 6-6
Dayton - Home 77-60 Davidson shot 52% from 3; 49% overall and committed 20 fouls. Dayton started 6-6, 6-6, 6-4, 6-0, and 6-2
Notably, Davidson does not shoot as well away from home and they foul a bit. Size didn't seem to kill UNC or UVA. I'm not saying Iowa is UNC or UVA, but Davidson is no Iowa State either. Lets not forget they are likely to be on the receiving end of some "in your face" dunks WITH our size advantage. I'm not saying that an Iowa win is a "given" but Davidson isn't the world-beaters that some in the press (like the referenced article) are making them out to be either.
This post was edited on 3/18 4:22 PM by michael65
This is exactly right. We have to contest EVERY shot, and if we contest every shot well and they still go in then Hawks will probably lose. But I like our chances that they won't hit a high % of well contested shots. Less than 3 times all game do I want to see a Davidson player with his feet set and no hands in his face. I would like zero, but there is always a few scrambles where this happens.
I think it is a big advantage that we can close out as HARD as we want and not fear them going to the rim on us. Plus I still cannot get past the 10% drop in their 3pt % home vs road. I think that is a big deal......then throw on top of that the big venue. I think they shoot 33% from 3 in this game if we D them up, and Hawks win by 10-12
Absolutely. Davidson's de facto center, Peyton Aldridge, is not Niang. He's a 6'7" PF playing the 5 that Woodbury has a decent chance to be able to slow down. And if Woodbury can't, I'm confident Olaseni can.
Davidson doesn't play four guards much as far as I can tell. Barham's 6'4", but he's really a power forward and he's not a threat from 3. Michelsen is a SF. Both are absolutely the kind of player that White or Uthoff could guard.
The article gets at the big reason we need to worry, though. If we want to play our usual starting lineup, that means Uthoff would draw Kalinoski or Sullivan. Both will give Uthoff some trouble unless we zone -- especially Kalinoski. Davidson's been very good against zone defense this year (as you'd expect from a team that shoots it like they do), so I don't expect us to try to play zone much against them.
Keep in mind, though, that our starting lineup poses big mismatches for them as well. Uthoff is way too long for Kalinoski to guard. With White and Olaseni also having mismatches against whomever Davidson throws at them, I think Davidson would probably be forced to play zone against our usual starting lineup, even though it's not a defense Davidson plays much.
We've had inconsistent guard play most of the year, so if we are forced to play three guards, I think that's a big issue for us. I want to see us take our chances with Uthoff on one of their smaller guards -- probably Sullivan, since it's less of a catastrophe if he gets a good look at 3 (he's 35% on the year, Kalinoski and Gibbs are 43-44%). Sullivan's just 5'11", and I think Uthoff has the length to bother Sullivan's shot while still sagging off of him.
I'd love to be able to play Jok, but I really think both Jok and Oglesby would struggle against Gibbs or Kalinoski. Sapp will play the two quite a bit in this game -- and we'll actually still have a size advantage there if he does. We need someone with length and some quickness to guard Kalinoski, so I'd probably put Sapp on him.
Gibbs is a very good guard and is pretty explosive, but Gesell is quick laterally and will actually have a small height advantage guarding Gibbs. Which is big, because Gesell's had issues with taller guards shooting over him this year.
Definitely a lot of interesting match-up games in this one.
I think that the better point in the article is about being disciplined on defense and not sagging off shooters. We are what
we are. We are much taller, and they will have to get shots off over top of us. UNC beat them by 18, and Virginia beat them by 11. Neither appeared to go short in their matchups with Davidson.
In looking at the box scores of Davidson's opponents, the other team's big men typically have big scoring/rebounding nights. We should try to take advantage of that, rather than trying to beat Davidson at what they do really well. I think that Olaseni will need to see additional minutes, and he could have a huge game.
we are. We are much taller, and they will have to get shots off over top of us. UNC beat them by 18, and Virginia beat them by 11. Neither appeared to go short in their matchups with Davidson.
In looking at the box scores of Davidson's opponents, the other team's big men typically have big scoring/rebounding nights. We should try to take advantage of that, rather than trying to beat Davidson at what they do really well. I think that Olaseni will need to see additional minutes, and he could have a huge game.
Originally posted by ChiHawk1985:
The men have arrived! Let's hope Josh is just calling his shot for the entire tournament
Woody unable to walk down stairs without looking awkward
Posted from Rivals Mobile
The author uses Wisconsin and Northern Iowa as examples of teams the Hawks struggled with, Looking at Davidson's roster, I don't see a Kaminski or a Tuttle. While those teams may play what on paper looks like a guard oriented offense, The reality is the offense went through the bigger players. I guess I miss the point he is trying to make.
I am honestly just wondering how in the hell Davidson lost 7 games this year after reading the article.
I am honestly just wondering how in the hell Davidson lost 7 games this year after reading the article.
So the primary focus by the author is that IOWA is too tall to win; and then works the article into some kind of an attack on Adam Woodbury.
The focus of the article is on how many ways Iowa should lose....but then in the closing paragraph.
..."Hopefully Iowa will take advantage of Davidson's miniature size via a series of Aaron White dunks and uncontested Uthoff threes, and their own defense won't matter much."...
I think the author should find a new hobby.
The focus of the article is on how many ways Iowa should lose....but then in the closing paragraph.
..."Hopefully Iowa will take advantage of Davidson's miniature size via a series of Aaron White dunks and uncontested Uthoff threes, and their own defense won't matter much."...
I think the author should find a new hobby.
Its not as if Iowa plays a slow, plodding style of offense. Hawks play up tempo and score inside.
Hawks are being utterly disregarded which is just fine for now.
Hawks are being utterly disregarded which is just fine for now.
The only thing I agree with in that article is playing Gabe lots of minutes, not sagging of shooters, and there might be a role for Uhl. Davidson is good at small-ball. We are not. I don't think we beat them playing their game.
The key is that our forwards (White, Uthoff, Uhl, and Jok) play with intensity defensively. They are all good enough athletes to close out out on shooters and they all have length to contest shots. It's just focus and intensity from there. Run these guys off the line, make them create off the bounce, make them challenge Gabe at the rim. Davidson has mid-major athletes (high-major skills) so we need to use our high-major length and athleticism to contest their set-shots.
We also need to absolutely crush them at the rim on offense. Drive the ball, post the ball, attack the glass. Gessell should be able to finish at the rim against this team. White should be charging to the rim. Gabe should be posting up all day drawing fouls.
The key is that our forwards (White, Uthoff, Uhl, and Jok) play with intensity defensively. They are all good enough athletes to close out out on shooters and they all have length to contest shots. It's just focus and intensity from there. Run these guys off the line, make them create off the bounce, make them challenge Gabe at the rim. Davidson has mid-major athletes (high-major skills) so we need to use our high-major length and athleticism to contest their set-shots.
We also need to absolutely crush them at the rim on offense. Drive the ball, post the ball, attack the glass. Gessell should be able to finish at the rim against this team. White should be charging to the rim. Gabe should be posting up all day drawing fouls.
Yeah he probably had plenty of legroom on the flight and isn't cramped up or sore at all!Originally posted by dawgs_04:
Originally posted by ChiHawk1985:
The men have arrived! Let's hope Josh is just calling his shot for the entire tournament
Woody unable to walk down stairs without looking awkward
Posted from Rivals Mobile
I think the biggest mistake the Hawks could make would be to abandon OUR advantages in length. I fully expect Woody's minutes to be limited....even to the 10-15 minute range...or less. After that....we don't need to make drastic changes to the line-up. I could see "going small" for some stretchs...ie Jok/MG/Sapp/AW/JU or maybe Uhl thrown in there....
I absolutely DO NOT want to see us going 4 guards as the writer insanely suggests. That would be suicide...we can't beat them at their game. We need to make adjustments but don't take away our advantages.
I think Uthoff is one of the keys...he has the ability to block shots on the perimeter and hopefully disrupt the their 6' 4" shooting guard Kalinoski....
Just don't want to see us throw away our advantages trying to adjust to them.
I absolutely DO NOT want to see us going 4 guards as the writer insanely suggests. That would be suicide...we can't beat them at their game. We need to make adjustments but don't take away our advantages.
I think Uthoff is one of the keys...he has the ability to block shots on the perimeter and hopefully disrupt the their 6' 4" shooting guard Kalinoski....
Just don't want to see us throw away our advantages trying to adjust to them.
Uhh, it's the NCAA tournament. That means that once it gets to the under 6 minute mark in the 2nd half at least 5 threes will go in for the opponent of the team you were rooting for, that didn't go in (and to be honest never looked close to going in) before. Just because it's a "big game" and those shots have to apparently go in.
Bau...
Goliath Had a Reputation for a Reason (long)
I usually like Horace E. Cow's stuff. Not this one.
Only one basketball (at a time) is allowed in the game. Therefore, when someone says, "All five positions are three point shooters!" Well, yes, but not all at once! I believe Davidson will be hampered first by the fact that this is not the shoot-around during warm-ups.
And the secret to defending the three? Defending the three! It's not that hard, we've been doing it all year. To varied degrees of success, as is the nature of the game of basketball. But we'll get to that in the conclusion,
Guess what our opponents have averaged shooting threes against us this season? And no, I'm not going to tell anyone, because the article from Black Heart Gold Pants has me a little perturbed and in case Horace is reading I want him to have to do some work (look it up Horace!). I'll just give a little clue, it is a heck of a lot lower than what Davidson shoots!
And thanks to another poster, who I wish I could credit but can't recall who it was, we all know (presumably) that Davidson has hit about 35% of their threes on the road this year.
So we've already got some reason to believe that the mighty sling that Davidson carries around has some flaws, away from home they just don't sling fling as well. And at times Iowa has been known to defend the sling fling quite well. Remember the matchup zone that when it is working causes announcers to gush about our length? Gush about it Horace!
Bottom line, something has got to give between Davidson wearing out the nets and Iowa not just blocking, but catching all their shots (they are short) in midair and enjoying breakaway dunks. (we are tall) And if we start with Davidson's road average makes? And if we can extrapolate that it will be just that much harder against the Hawkeyes? Suddenly the three doesn't look so much like their weapon, but their curse.
I think. I'm no Cow of course. But I think that Davidson will take many threes a foot or two further off the line than they like, or with a hand in the face, or in a hurry because our length will drive them crazy.
I'm not captivated by the incredible Davidson plan of being short! Yes, they are different, and different is good in advertising and fashion. And that explains why the pundits like Davidson. However In basketball a long time ago some very good coaches started to figure out that tall was better. Remember that, Horace? Hor, pal, did you ever think that maybe Davidson enjoyed the kind of season it did because of the teams they played?
Davidson is a one trick pony and for that reason we don't need to worry about help defense or getting killed on rebounds (or even competitively challenged on rebounds) and cripes that's even more reason to suspect we'll stifle their three point shots.
Now let's talk about our advantages on the offensive end. They say a picture is worth 1,000 words. So real quick.
There, that saved some time.
So in closing. Iowa beats Davidson and it isn't even close. Unless. Did anyone notice that UC Irvine was invited for the first time ever? The Anteaters in the NCAA's. Does anyone recognize the slightly weird way that ties in to talking about Davidson? I'm not going to say because I want Horace to wonder about it.
Let's just say it would take an Anteater effort for Davidson to be the team that knocks Iowa out of the Tournament. It's so very slightly possible. Almost a hand of God like Miracle. Otherwise it's done, over, and I doubt Horace nor the pundits pause to think before moving on to talk about how Iowa is the David to Gonzaga's Goliath.
This post was edited on 3/19 7:06 AM by DanL53
I usually like Horace E. Cow's stuff. Not this one.
Only one basketball (at a time) is allowed in the game. Therefore, when someone says, "All five positions are three point shooters!" Well, yes, but not all at once! I believe Davidson will be hampered first by the fact that this is not the shoot-around during warm-ups.
And the secret to defending the three? Defending the three! It's not that hard, we've been doing it all year. To varied degrees of success, as is the nature of the game of basketball. But we'll get to that in the conclusion,
Guess what our opponents have averaged shooting threes against us this season? And no, I'm not going to tell anyone, because the article from Black Heart Gold Pants has me a little perturbed and in case Horace is reading I want him to have to do some work (look it up Horace!). I'll just give a little clue, it is a heck of a lot lower than what Davidson shoots!
And thanks to another poster, who I wish I could credit but can't recall who it was, we all know (presumably) that Davidson has hit about 35% of their threes on the road this year.
So we've already got some reason to believe that the mighty sling that Davidson carries around has some flaws, away from home they just don't sling fling as well. And at times Iowa has been known to defend the sling fling quite well. Remember the matchup zone that when it is working causes announcers to gush about our length? Gush about it Horace!
Bottom line, something has got to give between Davidson wearing out the nets and Iowa not just blocking, but catching all their shots (they are short) in midair and enjoying breakaway dunks. (we are tall) And if we start with Davidson's road average makes? And if we can extrapolate that it will be just that much harder against the Hawkeyes? Suddenly the three doesn't look so much like their weapon, but their curse.
I think. I'm no Cow of course. But I think that Davidson will take many threes a foot or two further off the line than they like, or with a hand in the face, or in a hurry because our length will drive them crazy.
I'm not captivated by the incredible Davidson plan of being short! Yes, they are different, and different is good in advertising and fashion. And that explains why the pundits like Davidson. However In basketball a long time ago some very good coaches started to figure out that tall was better. Remember that, Horace? Hor, pal, did you ever think that maybe Davidson enjoyed the kind of season it did because of the teams they played?
Davidson is a one trick pony and for that reason we don't need to worry about help defense or getting killed on rebounds (or even competitively challenged on rebounds) and cripes that's even more reason to suspect we'll stifle their three point shots.
Now let's talk about our advantages on the offensive end. They say a picture is worth 1,000 words. So real quick.
There, that saved some time.
So in closing. Iowa beats Davidson and it isn't even close. Unless. Did anyone notice that UC Irvine was invited for the first time ever? The Anteaters in the NCAA's. Does anyone recognize the slightly weird way that ties in to talking about Davidson? I'm not going to say because I want Horace to wonder about it.
Let's just say it would take an Anteater effort for Davidson to be the team that knocks Iowa out of the Tournament. It's so very slightly possible. Almost a hand of God like Miracle. Otherwise it's done, over, and I doubt Horace nor the pundits pause to think before moving on to talk about how Iowa is the David to Gonzaga's Goliath.
This post was edited on 3/19 7:06 AM by DanL53
They have comment sections on Black Heart Gold Pants where you could point out the author's error. Or, you could reply on this thread with enlarged, billboard like letters.
It is of course the most important part of the article, the whole point really..because it is the part that mention's Iowa State.
Good morning, Little Brother.
Edit back at ya...it doesn't seem so bad now with the "Hawks win, relax" added to it.
This post was edited on 3/19 7:19 AM by DanL53
Similar threads
