Woodbury/three
- Thread starter jimbob22
- Start date
The short answer is if Woody took a three it would be so far outside our offensive scheme as to warrant a time out and fingerprint test to see if he really is Adam.
I much prefer we continue to perfect what, when we are clicking as we have in four of our last six games, seems to be a fantastic offense.
And maybe when we are up twenty-five with five minutes to go Woody might launch a three. But considering that against Rutgers Fran let walkons have it but good for their play on the court? If I were Woody I'd pass up the shot.
Welcome to the board, by the way.
I much prefer we continue to perfect what, when we are clicking as we have in four of our last six games, seems to be a fantastic offense.
And maybe when we are up twenty-five with five minutes to go Woody might launch a three. But considering that against Rutgers Fran let walkons have it but good for their play on the court? If I were Woody I'd pass up the shot.
Welcome to the board, by the way.
One of the great things about Woody is that he does not force his offense and typically takes good and high percentage shots. That is why you have a guy that many wouldn't consider a great shooter and certainly not a great finisher with a pretty nice FG percentage.
When people miss this and only to point out his negatives it makes it pretty easy to see who doesn't understand the game of basketball all that well.
When people miss this and only to point out his negatives it makes it pretty easy to see who doesn't understand the game of basketball all that well.
I would love to see him chuck one up just for shits and giggles. Of course i would want it to be with game in hand. What are the odds if he makes it he banks it in? I remember Brad Lohaus being a really good 3 pt shooter. Bruce 'Sky' King had a nice outside shot also but there was no 3 pt shot when he played.
I'm excited to see some new posters on here. This is a fun place to talk Hawkeye basketball. Hope you enjoy it. Word of advice, on a scale from one to one hundred with one being nothing Hawkeye is ever any good and one hundred being nothing can ever go wrong you will find every opinion represented.
Some folks, me unfortunately included, occasionally fling their opinions about like some pie throwing fight. The advice? Pie washes off with water.
Again, welcome....and DUCK!
Gotcha ya'll first!!!
Some folks, me unfortunately included, occasionally fling their opinions about like some pie throwing fight. The advice? Pie washes off with water.
Again, welcome....and DUCK!
Both are very bad options. Woody needs to focus on finishing at the rim and making free throws. Jok just needs to keep taking shots within the offense and maintaining concentration on defense.
This is what is wrong with this board.
Somebody posts an idea, and instead of politely disagreeing and explaining why, the OP is belittled and disparaged.
You can't have an intelligent conversation when posters are falling all over themselves to see who can be the most spiteful.
Originally posted by DanL53:
I'm excited to see some new posters on here. This is a fun place to talk Hawkeye basketball. Hope you enjoy it. Word of advice, on a scale from one to one hundred with one being nothing Hawkeye is ever any good and one hundred being nothing can ever go wrong you will find every opinion represented.
Some folks, me unfortunately included, occasionally fling their opinions about like some pie throwing fight. The advice? Pie washes off with water.
Again, welcome....and DUCK!
First people complain because he doesn't play above the rim enough, and now people want him to start jacking up 3's? Can't have it both ways with Woody.
Woodbury needs to not shoot threes, probably ever. And no, he isn't listed as having attempted one in college.
Jok might need to play point if they make it illegal for anyone on the court to move from their spots. Since they can, and Jok is allowed to move from the wing to the top of the key after they are into their offense, he doesn't need to play point. He can just go there without the ball.
Jok might need to play point if they make it illegal for anyone on the court to move from their spots. Since they can, and Jok is allowed to move from the wing to the top of the key after they are into their offense, he doesn't need to play point. He can just go there without the ball.
With Gesell and the emergence of Clemmons i think Iowa is fairly solid right now at the point. To me Jok is more valuable shooting the wing jumpers and the 3's.
A few weeks back someone called up the radio call in show that McCaffery is on, and asked if he ever thought about putting Uhl at point?
McCaffery complimented the caller for thinking outside the box, and said it wasn't out of the realm of possibility with as good a ball handler as Uhl is. He went on to say though that there are things Uhl would have to learn and he kind of indicated they had other priorities.
But McCaffery had nothing but good things to say about the caller. It was easy to tell from his tone that Fran enjoyed the question.
jimbob22, I think you re going to really enjoy season 2015/16 with all these new guys. You might get to see some creative surprises.
I am also excited for next year. But i am still fired up that this team still has a tremendous upside going forward. And unlike some i think our fans are going to see an exciting football team next year. And hey, don't forget about baseball. They were good last year and should be better this year. And lest i forget the women are great and fun to watch.
There is actually quite a bit of intelligent conversation in the BBall board. Much more than the FBall board. But when you post something that is this stupid, you are going to get crushed.
The reason Kaminsky can shoot and handle is because he was a 6' point guard as a HS Freshmen. By the time he was a HS Senior he was 6' 10" learning to play the post. Woody has always been a post player and that's why he doesnt and shouldnt shoot 3's.
No kidding. While I agree with dan that it is just not part of the game plan, it sure would add a whole different dimension wouldn't it? As the op stated, wordy does have a nice stroke, and did shoot 33% in ptl. So, honestly, not a terrible thought, just not part of the game plan.
The idea of Woody shooting threes is not a bad one. If it were going to happen, I think it should have been brought up 3 years ago when he committed so he could start working on it. I agree that his form does not look bad. His 10-15 foot shot doesn't look bad at all.
It is and interesting to think about how that would have helped White get more iso situations down in the post too.
It is and interesting to think about how that would have helped White get more iso situations down in the post too.
Someone always has to take a shot at Josh. He has struggled for sure. Nothing would make me happier than to have him come out and shoot lights out just once. Might not happen but he is still one of OUR guys.
I think the OP is into something here.
Obviously if Frank Kaminski can shoot 3s other white 7footets should be able to also.
Let's add a new element to the offense and start running Woodbury off screens to free him up for some long rang bombs.
Obviously if Frank Kaminski can shoot 3s other white 7footets should be able to also.
Let's add a new element to the offense and start running Woodbury off screens to free him up for some long rang bombs.
Lohaus didn't shoot a 3 till his RSSR year under Dr. Tom. and it saved his career and he ended up in the NBA because of it.
and yes Woody can shoot the 3 and looked good doing it, but in Fran's system he doesn't need to. even Gabe hit a 3 in the PTL even though I wouldn't want him to do in a BT game unless there was no doubt about the outcome one way or the other,
the question is why would you want a 7'1 player taking 3's when you have a 6'9 player in Uthoff, 6'9 White who can shoot the 3 {not as well as some would like} but he can still shoot the 3, the Idea is intriguing but it not a necessary option.
6'2 MG as the PG can dish and hit that midrange jumper
6'6 PJ as the SG can shoot the 3 and that little step back jumper
6'9 JU as the SF can shoot the 3 and now is more comfortable shooting the mid range jumper
6'9 AW as the PF can occasionally shoot the 3 can shoot the midrange jumper and can play around the rim
7'1 AW as the C can shoot the mid range jumper and has found out he can now Dunk and has a nice Hook shot just wished
he would use it more, as that is the hardest shot to block.
the backups have settled into their rolls, and are doing just fine.
and yes Woody can shoot the 3 and looked good doing it, but in Fran's system he doesn't need to. even Gabe hit a 3 in the PTL even though I wouldn't want him to do in a BT game unless there was no doubt about the outcome one way or the other,
the question is why would you want a 7'1 player taking 3's when you have a 6'9 player in Uthoff, 6'9 White who can shoot the 3 {not as well as some would like} but he can still shoot the 3, the Idea is intriguing but it not a necessary option.
6'2 MG as the PG can dish and hit that midrange jumper
6'6 PJ as the SG can shoot the 3 and that little step back jumper
6'9 JU as the SF can shoot the 3 and now is more comfortable shooting the mid range jumper
6'9 AW as the PF can occasionally shoot the 3 can shoot the midrange jumper and can play around the rim
7'1 AW as the C can shoot the mid range jumper and has found out he can now Dunk and has a nice Hook shot just wished
he would use it more, as that is the hardest shot to block.
the backups have settled into their rolls, and are doing just fine.
Umm you managed to leave this part of the original post out of your analysis:
When he squares up, he has a nice shot.
I'm fairly certain the premise was that Woodbury could potentially shoot 3s because of his shooting form, and not due to his race and height.
jmo
Thanks for the intelligent discourse.
Lohaus had his career saved by not shooting threes early in his time at Iowa. Because his career was saved, he ended up in the NBA.
Latest posts
-
-
-
HawkCast Ep. 94 RUN KALEB RUN: Johnson and the Hawkeyes Trounce Minnesota- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-