Hawkeye Women's Hoop season
- Thread starter IowaNiceHawk
- Start date
I believe schools have 2 days from the time an athlete requests to be listed in the transfer portal to actually do it. I think Raoul's tweet from yesterday shows that was done.
I don't think schools have an obligation to post an official announcement that a player is transferring. Iowa did for Jensen, but after a quick search I couldn't find an Iowa State post saying Feuerbach transferred. A lack of announcement doesn't mean it isn't happening.
This also strikes me as the perfect news to announce at 4 or 4:30 on a Friday, so an official announcement could still be coming.
I assume you mean from the school she is transferring to. I am guessing Drake first and UNI second. Both could use her.
No idea how realistic it would be, but I'd love to see Megan Meyer at South Dakota, South Dakota State, or Missouri State. All great mid major programs that are still fairly local. I believe SDSU offered her back in high school. Or she could even go to Oklahoma! Would give us hawk fans yet another reason to root for Jennie Baranczyk to make a splash in the Big 12 in her first season there.
Last edited:
About Warnock, I saw this quote from Coach Bluder in a 247sports.com article. Note the next three years mention. Are the coaches already thinking extra year for McKenna with all the Top 100 recruits coming in? That is quite a statement.
“She (McKenna) can play so many different positions on the floor that she’s going to be a big asset for us over the next three years and is going to be a big part of our program."
McKenna Warnock key in Iowa Women's basketball program taking next step
McKenna Warnock's consistency was crucial for Iowa making a sweet-16 run in 2021.
247sports.com
The starters aside from Clark each taking an extra year is probably our best chance to make a deep run. They'll either start for the next few years or be passed on the depth chart by someone better.About Warnock, I saw this quote from Coach Bluder in a 247sports.com article. Note the next three years mention. Are the coaches already thinking extra year for McKenna with all the Top 100 recruits coming in? That is quite a statement.
“She (McKenna) can play so many different positions on the floor that she’s going to be a big asset for us over the next three years and is going to be a big part of our program."
McKenna Warnock key in Iowa Women's basketball program taking next step
McKenna Warnock's consistency was crucial for Iowa making a sweet-16 run in 2021.
In the short term (next year) I think the extra year hurts Iowa, because we would've had our whole team back anyway, whereas teams like Indiana and Maryland would've lost some impact players that they won't now.
In the long term, though, it should help. Bigger teams will still lose players to the WNBA, while Iowa will keep together a core that has already made a Sweet 16 run for 2-3 more seasons.
Why not— if you are good in wbb but not good enough for WNBA- why not do grad school and stretch your live out? If I were JBO I would have come back tooAbout Warnock, I saw this quote from Coach Bluder in a 247sports.com article. Note the next three years mention. Are the coaches already thinking extra year for McKenna with all the Top 100 recruits coming in? That is quite a statement.
“She (McKenna) can play so many different positions on the floor that she’s going to be a big asset for us over the next three years and is going to be a big part of our program."
McKenna Warnock key in Iowa Women's basketball program taking next step
McKenna Warnock's consistency was crucial for Iowa making a sweet-16 run in 2021.
'Three years' could also mean fall 2021, spring/fall 2022, and spring 2023, which would just comprise two seasons: the 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 seasons. I love McKenna Warnock but let's not read too much into things. Just a few weeks ago on here we were lamenting about how she might be transferring. 😅
The more interesting thing about Bluder's statement, to me, is that she mentions Warnock's ability to play multiple positions. So the coaches don't just think of her as playing the 4, which is all our mock-lineups have ever projected her as. Maybe we might see a 'big' lineup at times next season in which Warnock plays the 3? Or maybe Bluder simply meant that Warnock is equally comfortable as a 4 in the (high) post or a stretch 4 spotting up on the perimeter (which is where we usually saw her this year).
The more interesting thing about Bluder's statement, to me, is that she mentions Warnock's ability to play multiple positions. So the coaches don't just think of her as playing the 4, which is all our mock-lineups have ever projected her as. Maybe we might see a 'big' lineup at times next season in which Warnock plays the 3? Or maybe Bluder simply meant that Warnock is equally comfortable as a 4 in the (high) post or a stretch 4 spotting up on the perimeter (which is where we usually saw her this year).
Does this mean she probably isn't leaving the program? lol
I think Warnock could play the 3 when we are playing 2-3 zone just fine. Her defensive responsibility (bottom corner) wouldn't change in the 2-3 zone, and she's perimeter oriented anyway, so she would be fine on the wing in a half court set. I'm not sure I'd want her taking the ball up court with much frequency, but Clark mostly handles that now, so not a big issue.
I'm less sure she could play the 3 defensively in man or triangle and 2. In man, I'm not sure she's fast enough to guard opposing 3s well, though it would likely depend on matchups. In triangle and 2, she would either have to be one of the man defenders or the top of the triangle. I have the same quickness concerns about both responsibilities. In either defense, it would also take her further from the basket, which could hurt our rebounding some given that she is our best rebounder.
There's also the problem of depth. Right now we're deeper at 2 and 3 than we are at 4. I'm not sure it makes sense to shift Warnock to the 3 for any significant time unless Ediger or someone else is too good to play backup 4 minutes. That might change in 2022-2023, because both Gyamfi and Stuelke look like solid options at 4.
About Warnock, I saw this quote from Coach Bluder in a 247sports.com article. Note the next three years mention. Are the coaches already thinking extra year for McKenna with all the Top 100 recruits coming in? That is quite a statement.
“She (McKenna) can play so many different positions on the floor that she’s going to be a big asset for us over the next three years and is going to be a big part of our program."
McKenna Warnock key in Iowa Women's basketball program taking next step
McKenna Warnock's consistency was crucial for Iowa making a sweet-16 run in 2021.
That quote was from last fall. I think it’s safe to assume McKenna will be at Iowa for just 2 more years.
Daily Iowan article from 11/30/20
I think Ediger indicated she might pay the wing in college? O'Grady played the 4 in high school. They both come in as top 100 recruits, so its possible that they could result in shifting some of Warnocks minutes from the 4 to the 3.
O'Grady played the 4 in HS because she's on the same team as Lauren Betts, who is 6'7' and the best player in the 2022 class. I think she could play the 4 like Hannah Stewart or Chase Coley did a few years ago, but not as much like Warnock plays it now. I still think her best fit is at 5.
I am very, very skeptical that Ediger could play the wing. On tape she looks a fair bit slower than Warnock. She's also 6'3' and spent most of her time in high school defending as a 5. Offensively she could probably play on the wing in a half court set, but defensively.... We are already less athletic on the wings than most elite teams. I don't think lowering our wing athleticism is a recipe for success.
That sounds about right, but that means there are 5 pretty talented players going after the 5/4. Which is why I think Warnock might spend some time at the 4. I think Marshall slides to the point when Clark is out. This is going to be one of Bluders deepest teams, except at the point.
Of the three '21 recruits, it seems like there is more uncertainty about Ediger, certainly in terms of position, and perhaps also talent-wise. Her old ESPN evaluations (the only ones they have) describe her as "skilled face up-5 performer" (2019), and "fundamental low-post prospect" (2018). But Ediger's past comments make it seem like she sees herself as a 3/4. Also, her Michigan accolades did not live up to her national recruiting ranks. The Basketball Coaches Association of Michigan picked a 12-player Best of the Best All-State team, and Ediger was not on it, though she was on the Division 2 team. Similarly, she was not on the 5-player Detroit Free Press All State Dream Team. Now I get that Ediger played in Division 2 in relatively rural western Michigan, and may face a bias of sorts. Unfortunately, that also means she played against lesser talent on a night-in night-out basis. Finally, with her committing so early to Iowa, her offer list does not provide comfort about her talent level.
Ediger's athletic profile is very much like a 5. She's 6'3', fairly big, and not overly fast or athletic. I think she looks pretty good offensively in the low post, and she looks like a good rebounder.
What throws that all into question is that in the tape I saw, she liked to start on the perimeter on offense, and she appears to be a pretty good three-point shooter. She even shot a few confidently from Clark range. If we ran a 5 out offense at some point, I think she'd be the ideal 5 in that lineup.
I give her a good chance to be the backup 4 this year because she looks to have more skill thank Cook and because she adds more height. But she's not as natural of a fit at 4 as Warnock is now or as Stuelke and Gyamfi appear to be next year. If Warnock or Czinano stay an extra year, we're going to have a ton of 4 and 5 depth very soon.
International 3-point line distance approved in women’s college basketball
The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel approved several rule changes to 3-point line placement, live statistic technology, instant replay and challenges within women's college basketball.
www.ncaa.com
The 3 point line will be moved to 22' 1.75'' for this season. The old distance was 20' 9''.
Does this work to our advantage since we shoot 3's at an elite level compared to other teams? Or might we see our team 3pt% drop which could actually harm us a bit? I suppose as long as it doesn't drop off too much, we will still have an advantage out there over most other teams.
I don't think it will impact percentages much. I just went back and watched highlights of one of our games, and all but 1 or 2 of the threes made by both teams were shot from beyond the men's line (the new distance). Unless that game was an outlier, players are already taking shots from that distance anyway.International 3-point line distance approved in women’s college basketball
The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel approved several rule changes to 3-point line placement, live statistic technology, instant replay and challenges within women's college basketball.
The 3 point line will be moved to 22' 1.75'' for this season. The old distance was 20' 9''.
Does this work to our advantage since we shoot 3's at an elite level compared to other teams? Or might we see our team 3pt% drop which could actually harm us a bit? I suppose as long as it doesn't drop off too much, we will still have an advantage out there over most other teams.
It might depend on which offense Bluder decides to run. If we go back to the 2-post Triangle offense used back when they had Megan, Hannah, Chase, then I think Ediger could be the 4.
Warnock fits better on the perimeter for sure, but they seems to be bringing in several more traditional posts. It might depend on how well they can handle the defense side.
I'd be surprised if we go back to the old offense. Coach Bluder's recruiting looks more like a continuation of what we're doing now. We will have an excess of 4 and 5 depth this year and especially next year, but we also have excess 2 and 3 depth. I think that's more a reflection of our uptick in recruiting. As recently as last year, there were several players on the roster we could safely say wouldn't see the floor much going into the season. I don't think that will be as easy to do moving forward.
Okay, help me out here with the new players. Is that Ediger rightmost in the first row? And O'Grady and Affolter 2nd and 7th in the second row? And no Feuerbach yet?
Another question someone kept asking was when Megan Meyer's leaving would be announced. I see Drake finally tweeted about her signing a few days ago. Nothing I have seen from Iowa, but they are certainly not obligated to.
I think the 2nd and 7th in the second row are Ediger and O'Grady.
Back row: Kate, AJ (Ediger), Shateah, Logan, Monika, Sharon, Addison (O'Grady)
Front row: Caitlin, Gabbie, McKenna, Tomi, Sydney (Affolter)
Unsure where Kylie is!
Front row: Caitlin, Gabbie, McKenna, Tomi, Sydney (Affolter)
Unsure where Kylie is!
Kylie just showed up later in the day. Another observation: I've always seen Ediger and O'Grady listed at 6'3', but O'Grady looks noticeably taller in this photo, and it doesn't look like their shoes would make the difference.
Last edited:
hard to tell, but O'Grady looks taller than Monica and Sharon as well. It could be the angle though
I’ve seen that AJ (Allison) Ediger was listed 6’2”. Hopefully the roster will be updated soon and we shall see.
Here are our B1G opponents for 2021-22 season
Home & Away – Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern
Home Only – Illinois, Maryland, Michigan State, Ohio State
Away Only – Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Wisconsin
Home & Away – Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Northwestern
Home Only – Illinois, Maryland, Michigan State, Ohio State
Away Only – Penn State, Purdue, Rutgers, Wisconsin
Schedule thoughts:
Home & Away- These are somewhat rough. Indiana and Michigan should both be Top 4 teams in the conference. Northwestern might be somewhere in the middle of the pack, but they were one of the few teams that contained Clark well last year. Minnesota and Nebraska should also be in the middle of the conference, though either might be towards the back half of the middle. I wish we would've been able to play one or two of the worst teams twice just to help our conference record.
Away Only- This was about as good as we could've hoped for. Purdue and Wisconsin should be towards the bottom of the conference. Penn State is on the rise, but probably won't be better than middle of the pack in conference next year. And Rutgers has a ton of transfers. We'll see how they all mix together, but I'll guess they will be worse than last year's team until they show me otherwise. We are probably favorites in each of the Away only games.
Home Only- Again, about as good as we could've hoped for. Maryland is probably the conference favorite. Michigan State and Ohio State could compete for Top 4 in the conference. Playing all three of those teams once only and at home in that one game is good news for us.
