#1 the Indiana game again perfectly correlated to his last 2 years of play (1800 minutes), with 2 fouls in 28m of action.
the coaching staff should be aware of this data and the predictive value of this information in a way to better optimize his minutes.
for example, one could posit that Garza could have played, on average 26 more minutes before picking up his next 2 fouls , using this thinking that is the entire 2nd half and 6 minutes of the 1st half. Now using the thinking that he will get at least a 2 minute rest in 2nd half, that means he could have played the last 8 minutes of the 1st half.
just think, using the data from the last 2 years of his foul profile, IOWA could have played him the last 8 minutes of the 1st half, and still made a really good case that Garza could have played the remaining 18 2h minutes, and still ended the game with out fouling out. The data shows that.
the Iowa coaching staff should definitely look at these fouling profiles and not treat every single player the same, as the metrics show that some players foul less than others and can ‘play‘ with fouls . To treat every player the same is really an inflexible way to manage when there are clear differences, (at least as it relates to fouling propensity). The coaching staff must improve here.
#2. The theory of why Iowas defense is poor, particularly in the 1h. Again, we talked about this before, if you were an Iowa starter and you wanted to maximize your minutes played, why would you ever risk committing a foul, knowing that the 2foul rule will be an immediate and nonnegotiable 1h disqualification? Why when you’re trying to maximize your value in your post college career (which most starters have an agenda to play at a next level), why would you risk ever fouling anyone?
to score you need to be aggressive in the way you take the ball to the basket, and that will draw it’s fair share of fouls, so bring an offensive minded starter, you know you may pick up a foul trying to score, but that is a risk you MUST take to be a scorer, and you will EXPECT to pick up an offensive fouls for every, say 10-12 FGA, but the points scored is worth the risk.
but on defense, why pick up ANY foul that would put you into a scenario that will jeopardize your A. Playing time or B. your aggressiveness in scoring. There is NO value to play aggressive defense, only offense, as offense is what you must have to get exposure in the next level, and your defensive shortcomings can be well hidden amongst the high scoring trade off noise.
many here have posited that these 2 factors are related, some saying are causative. I’m in the voice that they are inter related and one contributes to the other, and to a degree will contribute to always being iowa’s kryptonite, (and yes, including this yr, and even a POY on the roster can’t overcome its effects)
#3. Lastly, Help,me understand the value of sitting Garza the last 12 minutes of 1H, then playing him the entire 20minutes of the 2h? Isnt the 1st minute of the 2nd half just a risk-filled as the last minute of the 1H? What is the rationale that says, that 1st minute of the 2nd half is the minute that we’ve passed the “threshold“ where the value is now worth the risk? There maybe some value in the half time talk, strategy, agree. But there’s also about 35 minutes real time in 12 minutes of 1h action that you could have easily denveloped and communicated the 2foul-Garza strategy. “OK guys, Garza has 2 fouls, so Nunge guards Trace-Davis, Nunge plays middle zone, Garza plays on wing of 2-3 zone, no press, and #2 #3 crash boards, all doudle Garza’s man so he must kick the ball out....” or whatever the message is, it can be delivered in real time in the huddles and distributed on the bench .
is is Monday afternoon quarterbacking if you’ve been talking about the same things for 2 years?
the coaching staff should be aware of this data and the predictive value of this information in a way to better optimize his minutes.
for example, one could posit that Garza could have played, on average 26 more minutes before picking up his next 2 fouls , using this thinking that is the entire 2nd half and 6 minutes of the 1st half. Now using the thinking that he will get at least a 2 minute rest in 2nd half, that means he could have played the last 8 minutes of the 1st half.
just think, using the data from the last 2 years of his foul profile, IOWA could have played him the last 8 minutes of the 1st half, and still made a really good case that Garza could have played the remaining 18 2h minutes, and still ended the game with out fouling out. The data shows that.
the Iowa coaching staff should definitely look at these fouling profiles and not treat every single player the same, as the metrics show that some players foul less than others and can ‘play‘ with fouls . To treat every player the same is really an inflexible way to manage when there are clear differences, (at least as it relates to fouling propensity). The coaching staff must improve here.
#2. The theory of why Iowas defense is poor, particularly in the 1h. Again, we talked about this before, if you were an Iowa starter and you wanted to maximize your minutes played, why would you ever risk committing a foul, knowing that the 2foul rule will be an immediate and nonnegotiable 1h disqualification? Why when you’re trying to maximize your value in your post college career (which most starters have an agenda to play at a next level), why would you risk ever fouling anyone?
to score you need to be aggressive in the way you take the ball to the basket, and that will draw it’s fair share of fouls, so bring an offensive minded starter, you know you may pick up a foul trying to score, but that is a risk you MUST take to be a scorer, and you will EXPECT to pick up an offensive fouls for every, say 10-12 FGA, but the points scored is worth the risk.
but on defense, why pick up ANY foul that would put you into a scenario that will jeopardize your A. Playing time or B. your aggressiveness in scoring. There is NO value to play aggressive defense, only offense, as offense is what you must have to get exposure in the next level, and your defensive shortcomings can be well hidden amongst the high scoring trade off noise.
many here have posited that these 2 factors are related, some saying are causative. I’m in the voice that they are inter related and one contributes to the other, and to a degree will contribute to always being iowa’s kryptonite, (and yes, including this yr, and even a POY on the roster can’t overcome its effects)
#3. Lastly, Help,me understand the value of sitting Garza the last 12 minutes of 1H, then playing him the entire 20minutes of the 2h? Isnt the 1st minute of the 2nd half just a risk-filled as the last minute of the 1H? What is the rationale that says, that 1st minute of the 2nd half is the minute that we’ve passed the “threshold“ where the value is now worth the risk? There maybe some value in the half time talk, strategy, agree. But there’s also about 35 minutes real time in 12 minutes of 1h action that you could have easily denveloped and communicated the 2foul-Garza strategy. “OK guys, Garza has 2 fouls, so Nunge guards Trace-Davis, Nunge plays middle zone, Garza plays on wing of 2-3 zone, no press, and #2 #3 crash boards, all doudle Garza’s man so he must kick the ball out....” or whatever the message is, it can be delivered in real time in the huddles and distributed on the bench .
is is Monday afternoon quarterbacking if you’ve been talking about the same things for 2 years?
