Blah Blah Blah - Legend - my point on the Basketball forum was a fundamental argument. My basis was it didn't appear they wanted a womens forum and it made no sense to not have a womens forum if they were bringing all the posts over here. This was my biggest argument. I am appreciative that they made a forum. As to what Kakert said was going to happen in the transition a lot of what he said and promised never occurred. Case in point - no posts from the old site transitions over here. 2ndly I didn't appreciate the threat of him nuking the free boards- stating that is what the owners wanted and thats the direction the boards were moving to. It made no sense to purchase a group of boards only to get rid of a large chunk of the posters. But if you want to continue to argue on Kakerts behalf again be my guest.
Read the wrong line - 7400 over 3 years. holy **** what a line to stand on. I am still posting at a ridiculous amount, just not as ridiculous as the first number. Averaging over 7 posts a day. Quite an accomplishment for you legend. How many posts would it be with the other site included - nearing 100k?
??? Until we play a team that decides to defend her, and then no.........She's still way to one dimensional on offense. She has worked on her defense, and on being a loose ball rebounder.
Haha
He said shooter, McCabe is a shooter. We weren't discussing any of the other bs you spouted about.
Aren't we? So what good is a "shooter" who can't get her shot off unless she's wide open when they play teams who defend her as PURELY a three point specialist. There have been lots of conference games where teams took her away from the offense, and if you can't "create" your own shot, (which she can't), you can be removed as a factor.
Yes, she is. But we were talking about a shooter. Someone who was going to provide SCORING from the perimeter. Maybe this year will be different, but honestly I don't think when we get into the meat of the schedule we'll be getting numbers from McCabe much different then previous year. Probably a few because she's going to play a few more minutes/gm, but I wouldn't be counting on her to give us double figure scoring for an average. I think its imperative that we get real growth from Deal/Erod. Certainly Stremlow has made strides, but we need another guard who can score.
There's no such thing as not belonging to the top 8. The 2018-2019 team with Gustafson was in the Elite 8 and then lost to Baylor by 30 points. Being in the top 8 doesn't mean they have to be toe-to-toe with the best of the best.
That is where I think they can get but it won't be easy. Elite eight maybe next year, the hopefully a final four. Currently the team doesn't have that go to player to get you a tough bucket or creative assist.
I think that CCW, when she comes back, along with Stremlow and McCabe can provide the outside shooting that the Hawks need. The team's obvious strength is inside with Heiden and Stuelke and they will both often attract double teams that will allow for open 3's if those girls make good decisions to find open shooters when the opportunity arises.
I think this years team is much better than last years team.
I agree this team is better. Better defense, better rebounding and fewer TO's. I think the offense will improve as some of the newcomers get more experience and Chit Chat returns.
1 statistic you have seen is slightly in Lucy’s favor. The assist to turnover ratio and rest of the statistics on turnovers and just the eyeball test tells you Chit Chat is the better point guard and has better handles. Which was my initial point. That is not a negative at all to Lucy- she was more of a scoring combo guard playing point for us and was the leader we needed last year.
Par for the course pick a fight then run away when he is shown he is wrong. He is wrong on the Chit Chat and Lucy debate and he is incredibly stupid trying to argue UNI and Drake are not comparable- they are the same schools we played last year. They may not be exactly the same or quite as good, but they are in the same ballpark.
They are same school dumb*ss. They may be slightly different in quality but you can’t be that stupid. They aren’t the level of Augustana.
Yeah, those are two big issues. Sadly, the team is without Emely, Teagan, and (i imagine) Chit-Chat, so they don't really have the horses to compete with the best teams. A loss at ISU will be really telling, will probably cool any jets imagining this team overperforming in March.
Steulke and Feuerbach have to lead this team.
This team has a number of consistent outside shooters. Not sure which team you’re watching
I believe with our youth, we are going to a lot better end of year. As far as another poster saying last years team was better? I believe objectively false. This years team is gonna be a lot better. The addition of Chat, Addie, Rodriguez and Houston are all very positive. The maturation of stremow, Heiden and Heiden are very positive too. We will will get an pretty good indication soon against ISU but out out ceiling in elite 8 at least
I'm gonna have to kind of disagree with you there Hanna and Kylie are not the leaders of the team this year. Ava is a superstar in the making and can dominate games. Hannah is an effective role player inside. On the outside it's Stremlow, and Chit Chat when healthy. Kylie is a good defender but she's not going to beat anyone. I thought Levin looked fantastic yesterday.
FT shooting has been a problem, but it's been isolated pretty much to Hannah and Hays who has been awful (1-6 vs Rutgers). Hays hopefully won't get extended minutes in more competitive games.
Iowa as a team is ranked #259, so I don't think it's only due to a couple of players...
www.ncaa.com
The team percentage ranking is bad, but the individual stats are readily available for everyone to see. Hannah and Hays have taken 31% of the foul shots and are shooting 58% and 44% respectively. Remove their stats and the team percentage jumps 7 points and their ranking jumps over 160 points. Ava shoots the most free throws and hasn't been great either at 69%, but she's been much better than those 2, particularly Hays.Iowa as a team is ranked #259, so I don't think it's only due to a couple of players...
NCAA College Women's Basketball DI current team Stats | NCAA.com
Discover the current NCAA Division I Women's Basketball leaders in every stats category, as well as historic leaders.
www.sports-reference.com
As the main point of internet message boards is to quibble / nit pick I will point out the jumping from 259 to somewhere around 100 still ain't great. ISU is ranked #14. Throw out Crooks and Hare and they're probably #1.
Yeah. She could definitely improve. They all could, but she's hovering close to 70% and her EFG% is 63%. Hanna and Hayes are just really really bad at 58% and 44% respectively.
