Keegan and Ulis Need More Minutes
- Thread starter BirdistheWord
- Start date
The first game was against a terrible opponent and, seriously, a Blind Man in the Bleachers moment. You cannot deny that Iowa's momentum noticeably slowed when Jack entered the game. The Baby Blue big men completely ate him alive.
The problem would not appear as significant if we did not have a lot of other evidence. Neither Jack or the team played well last year, until Jack was out of the equation and then the team took off with its new look. Freshman year was very mediocre, although I concede much can be said of many freshmen. But the problems still look the same. Lack of court awareness, lack of physicality and easily moved out of position. Lack of rebounding. It all looks the same. His shot looks terrible and he's missing badly. The ball freezes with Jack because he doesn't know what he's going to do with it before he gets it, also attributable to bad instincts.
Jack might get better but he needs to show immediate productivity or he gets yanked fast. His first impulse with the ball is a shot and he's not a good shooter. On the other hand, when Jack is playing pretty much every other Hawk on the floor is a superior offensive option. He should be looking at himself as the last guy that shoots, but he still fires away. Played 22 minutes, almost as many minutes as all three other reserves. 2-9/0-0/0-0 3 boards and 3 fouls.
When the opponent is Coastal Carolina or some other warm up act, and Iowa's leading by 20 is the time to let Jack work on his game. Other than two or three nice games over three (partial) seasons Jack has not shown himself to be a P5 contributor. His main asset appears to be F Mc's fondness and not what he's shown on the court.
Its like Glen Worley, except Jack is likable and I think everyone is pulling for him to get better, whereas Worley might be the most dislikable Hawk BBall player in memory. Well, there was that other guy that with the kidnapping and sexual assault proclivities but even he was more likable on the court than Glen Worley.
The problem would not appear as significant if we did not have a lot of other evidence. Neither Jack or the team played well last year, until Jack was out of the equation and then the team took off with its new look. Freshman year was very mediocre, although I concede much can be said of many freshmen. But the problems still look the same. Lack of court awareness, lack of physicality and easily moved out of position. Lack of rebounding. It all looks the same. His shot looks terrible and he's missing badly. The ball freezes with Jack because he doesn't know what he's going to do with it before he gets it, also attributable to bad instincts.
Jack might get better but he needs to show immediate productivity or he gets yanked fast. His first impulse with the ball is a shot and he's not a good shooter. On the other hand, when Jack is playing pretty much every other Hawk on the floor is a superior offensive option. He should be looking at himself as the last guy that shoots, but he still fires away. Played 22 minutes, almost as many minutes as all three other reserves. 2-9/0-0/0-0 3 boards and 3 fouls.
When the opponent is Coastal Carolina or some other warm up act, and Iowa's leading by 20 is the time to let Jack work on his game. Other than two or three nice games over three (partial) seasons Jack has not shown himself to be a P5 contributor. His main asset appears to be F Mc's fondness and not what he's shown on the court.
Its like Glen Worley, except Jack is likable and I think everyone is pulling for him to get better, whereas Worley might be the most dislikable Hawk BBall player in memory. Well, there was that other guy that with the kidnapping and sexual assault proclivities but even he was more likable on the court than Glen Worley.
That's called evidencing an argument. What's the counter evidence, other than optimism. The facts are the facts. They may change if the kid improves but right now he does not look improved and is an albatross against good opponents.
He’s played 5 games in the past 2 years. He’s missed 2 complete seasons basically. The only evidence you have is of him as a Freshman, which was a long time ago. Plus he’s had 2 major injuries. If at the end of the season if he hasn’t really put it together or figured it out then I think it’s fair to look at it. Evidencing an argument my ass.
This is how an argument works. My proposition/conclusion is Jack is not playing P5 ball. The things to which I cite to support my proposition are: We have the terrible play at the beginning of last year. Exhibit A. The team performance improving immediately after Jack's injury last season. Exhibit B. We have a less than mediocre freshman season. Exhibit D. We have the terrible game against UNC. Exhibit E. We have a visible loss of momentum when Jack was on the floor against UNC. Exhibit F. That is what evidence looks like. It all supports the conclusion that Jack has not played well at Iowa and/or hurts the team effort when on the floor.
You, apparently, contend Jack will get better and, also apparently, become a quality P5 player. That is NOT evidence merely a conclusion or proposition and its not even logical. It's emotionally aspirational. You hope (an emotion) or are optimistic (also an emotion) that Jack will get better. You also offer excuses for his generally low level of play, which make no difference to how he actually plays, only how you seek to excuse the poor play because of admittedly hard luck for the kid. I see those same factors as explanations of why Jack is playing poorly not as excuses that somehow make the poor play acceptable. Jack's play remains objectively poor regardless of how you excuse that poor play or optimistically aspire to see better play.
Time will ultimately tell. I could be wrong; as improbable as it seems I am sometimes mistaken. But probably not this time.
Last edited:
Jesus you are a pompous ass. Being out 2 years is not an excuse, it’s a fact. I find it funny that you want to give him the bulk of the blame for a poor season when he was a true Freshman playing out of position. Again, time will tell. Fran obviously sees something in him. You don’t. I think I’ll trust Frans judgement. Get back to me in a year or 2 because he will be a starter next year. You can bitch all you want then.
You never did answer my earlier point. If Nunge is not even a P5 worthy player, why are the NBA scouts interested in him already? I know, I know, you're a better talent evaluator then the Head coach, and the Pro's who get paid a lot of money doing specifically that.
That's a lot of evidencing for 7 games, outside of a freshman year when he was clearly given more of a role than he was ready for at the time. Seems like a pretty cynical take IMO.
Freshman Nunge averaged 4.5 shots per game, and at the time I thought he was passing up shots he should have taken. The returns are early, but right now he's shooting 50% through 2 games. His rebounding has been unimpressive, but I felt the same way about Garza his first 2 season.
Hawks4life....And you don't think this is trolling? To each his own...JMO
Don't know if you noticed, but I think Connor got only 16 against NC. And we seemed to do fine.
Not enough of a sample size on Ulis yet, but I wouldn't give him any of Joe T's minutes at this point.
I am onboard with Keegan seeing the floor more at the 4 spot, maybe even occasionally at the 5 if they go small ball and Luka needs a breather or has foul trouble.
I am onboard with Keegan seeing the floor more at the 4 spot, maybe even occasionally at the 5 if they go small ball and Luka needs a breather or has foul trouble.
I do not believe the story that NBA scouts are looking at Nunge. There is a strong body of opinion, with which I disagree, that Luka may not make it in the NBA. The Nunge story sounds like some F McC hyperpole. As in, the scouts called about Luka and then asked about the other big guy. There were no NBA scouts calling based on what they saw Tuesday night.
Moreover, I also rarely, indeed very rarely, disagree with a coach's decisions regarding PT. The last time I can remember was Glen Worley. I was in the Ricky Stanzi camp, what 11 years ago? The coach's decision followed mine about half a game after I thought the plug should be pulled.
In this case one sees what one sees. I do not see any improvement in Jack's game. The same issues, weak play, spacing, lack of motion, too many shots for a poor shooter, poor defense and terrible rebounding effort.
Last edited:
First a correction from my post above. I said 16 and it sounded like points, but I meant Connor played 16 minutes. Also, Garza was only 6/20 shooting - why aren't you all over him? And Jack scored 16 or 18 one game a few the next. You can have bad shooting nights especially when you are going against much bigger guys that most teams throw out there. I will wait to pass judgement.
Toussaint can make plays offensively and defensively no one else can. And, he is not a 2-Guard.
So why exactly would the announcer say that several league scouts called him about Nunge after he had watched practice? That makes no sense. If he was just doing that to make it sound like he had connections, he would have said they called about Luka, or Joe W. Why would he pull Nunge out of thin air like that?
I am very cynical because the real world kind of sucks and my personality is not given to fantastic optimism. Although, if given the choice of two equally probable outcomes I typically prefer the better outcome. There is not equally probative evidence on Jack Nunge, however.
Every thing I said is accurate and the voluminous quantity is indicative of just how right I am. There is much evidence to support the proposition that Jack Nunge is not a P5 player. That may change; of course. At this point he simply is not very good at anything Big Ten basketball. A taller less athletic Dom Uhl, about whom Fran was always spinning stories of his prowess that somehow existed on the court with no greater frequency than the blind squirrel finding a nut.
I think that story was hyperbole, just some semi bullshit filling time while trying to compliment a kid going through a terrible life experience at an altogether too early age. To paraphrase John Lennon: "Here's another clue for you all"..... don't everything you hear on television.
I don't know about terrific but it was a very improved performance and against a somewhat decent opponent. I'd note it came when Luka was out and Jack Nunge had the interior space to himself. Trend line took a solid uptick tonight.
I always here announcers randomly talking about the nba scouts inquiring about em!
Wait.....
I dont know about ulis, but I truly think murray deserves his own thread. Kid shows grit hustle and balls that we need,!
He hit a nice 3, a baseline jumper, a pick and roll dunk and had a double/double or damn near in the First Half. He kept Iowa in the lead.
I smell burning crow......
All Nunge has to be this year is be Kriener 2.0, thus far it looks like that should be easily achievable for him. He really stepped up and gave us a lift when Garza had to leave with foul trouble.
Never overcook your fast birds, they dry out faster than domestic foul. However I did load some bird shot in my 20ga.
Good game tonight for the kid. There were some problems, especially early but as I said elsewhere, then he picked it up and started making some plays. Major contributor to the win tonight. Big uptick in the trend line.
You guys all know this is a win/win for me. Either Jack ends up as a mediocrity and my early opinions were ahead of the curve and I get the win, and being right never gets old. Always fun to be the smart kid at the smart kids table. Still see the NBA story as probably significant exaggeration but we'll never know.
Or, I'm wrong, Jack becomes a reliably good player. Bigger win for me because Iowa has another good center on their hands and next year, however uncertain post Luka may be, is somewhat less uncertain than it would otherwise be. That's far more important to me than merely being right, yet again, and on a trivial subject, disagreement over the qualities of a basketball player.
So we should just talk shit about all hawkeyes, that way we always win?
Pass
So we should just talk shit about all hawkeyes, that way we always win?
Pass
Like the guys that predict a Hawkeye loss in 10 football games a year and are then pissed because we only won ten games?
I think a lot of people also forget that Jack is not playing a long time position. Fran essentially had to talk him i to playing in the front court as he grew because he was a SF in high school. I believe his injury may have helped him as it forced him to take another year to sit and watch to better learn what it takes to play around the rim. That said, its still a learning process.......behind Garza
Garza didn't have to leave, Fran just thinks he does.
I hate his stubbornness with that idea.
Just about every coach in the country would have sat their star play who picked up a 2nd fouls 7 minutes into the game for at least a few minutes.
I don’t like this as a hard and fast rule, but I can understand it to some extent on a team like this when we have a deep bench and aren’t so dependent on just one guy. Being fair to Fran, he’s far from the only coach who is stubborn about this rule.
Similar threads
