58-43: It's Been a While, But Iowa Finally Won a Big Ten Road Game
Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake.
-Napoleon Bonaparte, whose mistake is appropriately immortalized as the name of Iowa's fifth-most populous city
Give Iowa credit: when Indiana was biffing at every aspect of play, the Hawkeyes dutifully stayed out of the Hoosiers' way.
We'd said earlier that this was Iowa's last, best chance at a road victory. Lo. and. be-goddamn-hold. It instead turned into Iowa's most lopsided Big Ten win since--no, we're not kidding--1 year and 363 days ago, when Iowa beat Penn State by a similar 15-point margin on January 26, 2008. The last BXI win by more than 15 points was the season prior, when Iowa took out PSU (again) by 16 points. Further, it was Iowa's best road game in the conference since 2005, when they beat--yes, you guessed it--Penn State by 18.
And yet, it was not at all a function of Iowa correcting their most destructive mistake: turnovers. Iowa committed 20 last night, which is a horrific, unconscionable number by itself. Combine that with the fact that there were only 58 possessions in the entire game, however, and you get the fact that Iowa actually recorded their highest turnover percentage of the entire season.
So how did Iowa end up winning this game with such an outrageous disregard for offensive discipline? Where Iowa always never wins game: the offensive glass. The Hawkeyes--who, as you might recall, struggle on the offensive glass at a comical rate--gathered almost 60% of their misses last night. No, seriously--the Hawkeyes had 17 offensive rebounds, and Indiana had 12 defensive rebounds. That actually happened. It won't happen again, mind you; Iowa had never previously cracked 50% and only broke 40% against perennial powerhouses UTSA and North Carolina Central. But if you wanted to find a reason for Jarryd Cole and Aaron Fuller combining for 24 points on 17 shots from the field, their 10 combined offensive boards would be an awesome place to start.
All told, Iowa recorded 20(!!!) second-chance points thanks to their dominance of the glass. Indiana? Just seven. There's your game, basically. Well, that and Indiana's comical 0-9 performance from behind the arc.
And yet, statistical parsing aside, something's got to be said for Iowa's performance last night.
Sure, it might not have been objectively better than their loss to Michigan State, but they endured two trademark cold snaps and responded to both with runs of their own. For example, when Indiana had pushed the margin back to two points with 13:23 left, Fuller hit a free throw, then Brennan Cougill went absolutely bananas; in one four-possession stretch, he grabbed a defensive rebound, hit a three, drew a charge, then hit another three. The second shot was especially beautiful; Cougill took a pass from John Lickliter behind the arc, faked a pass, and found himself wide open. He took the "jumper"* in rhythm and put Iowa up by nine; after the ensuing two possessions, the Hawkeyes never led by less than eleven for the rest of the game. Sorry, SCJ, but that's exactly what you want out of a situational bench player.
Fuller's performance must be mentioned; he went 6-11 for 13 points and four rebounds, which seem like rather pedestrian numbers for the sophomore forward these days. But he was utterly mauled in the paint on a consistent basis, while rarely drawing a foul. Further, his makes regularly came outside of five feet, the usual result of good position, good footwork, and good finishing skill on his shots. Those were not 13 easy points, we assure you.
Aside from that, Cully Payne looked alternatively competent and maddening (and trending toward the latter), Matt Gatens struggled with his shot but hit them when they mattered, and Lickliter proved why he wouldn't see minutes on most D-I teams these days. We love Li'l John, as you'll well know by now, and the so-great-it-must-be-caloric irony is that there isn't a single less Lickliter-ish player on the roster (hoistin', hot-doggin', and heaving the ball out of bounds? Dad is not impressed, Junior) than John. But this is his second consecutive game with more turnovers than made shots, and he's only 2-15 from behind the arc in his last six BXI games. Hell, we can do that.
Really, though, the big story here is that Indiana played terribly last night. This isn't to take anything away from Iowa's performance--the most lopsided conference road win in the last five years absolutely must mean something substantial--but it was Indiana's worst-shooting night of the season and Iowa's best defensive EFG% performance of the season. We call these situations "outliers." And really, that's what it was. Iowa's defense was not uncharacteristically contentious, Indiana just biffed open shot after open shot, often within 12 feet. Iowa did too, of course, but the Hawks' forwards at least had the common courtesy to corral the missed shots. Indiana's had no such etiquette.
Interestingly, the most encouraging aspect of the entire game may have come even before the opening tip; it's when the announcers (who--though we don't remember their names--absolutely sucked dog balls during gameplay) mentioned that Todd Lickliter had said the team needs to go inside more for their own good. We've been saying it for weeks now; Eric May shouldn't be left to hoist 25-footers, and this team needs to punish over-aggressive shot defenders with mid-range jumpers instead of passing back outside the arc after beating a man off the dribble. We saw more of exactly that last night, as Iowa attempted 33 of their 48 shots from inside the arc. Mind you, this was usually an effect of their offensive rebounding, but that's not the full story; Cole and Fuller aside, both May and Payne had a renewed focus on putting the ball up off the dribble, and that diversification will lead to more open jumpers as the season wears on.
Okay, done nit-picking. Iowa just won. On the road. In the Big Ten. By double digits. This is a cause for celebration. Moreover, it means Iowa's 3-1 over their last four games, and the one loss was the nailbiter at Michigan State. Are the Hawkeyes "back?"Jesus Boxing-Out Christ, no. They still ought to lose at least seven of their last eight games. But in a season where progress has to measured incrementally and outside the W/L, this last stretch qualifies as significant progress--even if these inglorious bastards won't stop turning the goddamn ball over. Hey, you take your victories where and when you can get them.
*The term "jumper" belongs in quotes, since Cougill's vertical is officially measured as "NOPE."
0 recs |
26 comments
|
Comments
where do we go from here?
Did we see improvement? Or is Indiana just that awful? I’m wary to think that the team has suddenly improved. Every time I go down that road, because they have pulled off a decent win, I just end up being disappointed a few days later.
by mikjones24 on Jan 25, 2010 9:39 AM CST via mobile reply actions
I say both
Iowa has certainly played better their last few games, but Indiana is probably really is just that awful as well.
If you never get your hopes too high, you can never be disappointed…
by HeroPatriotStanzi on Jan 25, 2010 9:52 AM CST up reply actions
disregard that second "is"
proofread fail
by HeroPatriotStanzi on Jan 25, 2010 9:53 AM CST up reply actions
A little from column A, a little from column B,IIMO...
The fact that they pushed the ball inside as much as they did was great to see and hopefully a sign of things to come.
On the other hand, Indiana was fucking wretched yesterday and their post defense was laughable; even if we want to dump the ball inside more, chances are we won’t have near as much success against any other opponent this year.
In the short-term, I could easily see Iowa following up this game with a blowout loss to OSU this week. The idea of anyone on our team trying to guard Evan Turner is horrifying (May is probably the best option and he’s still gonna get abused).
But after that three of our next four games (the fourth is a return date with OSU, which should also be ugly) are @Michigan and home against Illinois and jNW. Michigan is pretty much every bit as terrible as PSU, Indiana, and Iowa, so that doesn’t look hopeless. Illinois and jNW are better than Iowa, but I don’t expect ugly routs. (Which means I am probably deluded, but hey!)
"I want to be a cowboy. I don't want to be a panda. Pandas are boring, stupid and boring. Bad panda!"
I want to be optimistic...
and think that Iowa will get multiple more (yes, grammarFail) Big Ten wins after the recent run of success (3 of 4, yay).
However, I had been calling that we would beat Indiana at least once this year for awhile now. Yes, after Hoosierville beat Pitt, I quit flapping those gums, but I still thought the Hawks could beat them at least once.
And so, if we beat them at Bloomington, then logic would hold that we should be able to beat them at Carver. However, just reading Ross’s post made me realize that our remaining schedule holds no other games where we will be favored.
Now, we still have more than half of the big ten season yet, and many things can happen to all teams (injuries, suspensions, typhoons, etc.) But I still think Iowa getting to 12 or more wins will be a miracle.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Jan 25, 2010 8:45 PM CST up reply actions
Regardless of how bad they may or may not be...
the team is getting a chance to experience some wins at this level. That alone has to help.
Actuall, this is a good win
because what if they had lost? That’s the way I look at it. Lickliter finally got this team to think about the part of the court inside the 3 point arc. That Bawinkle saw as many minutes as Lickliter Jr. tells me that Lick Sr. is seriously attempting phase two of his construction project. Although, don’t look now but here come Tucker who ventures inside the paint only during the pregame layup drill.
I think this a crucial time for Lickliter. If Fuller continues to grow and Gatens settles in, and the team plays better defense, then I think we play teams closer and he saves his job. If, however, this is a blip and the team backslides. Well, all bets are off.
Say what you will about this team, but they have had moments of surprise competence. Against Texas in the first half, against Michigan State in second half. Meanwhile, they have no depth, no height, no experience, and are not particularly athletic.
Which leads to the inevitable question: If Lickliter ever had any athletic players, with height, and experience, and more than one of them, what could he do? I’m not talking first team All Big Ten talent either. I’m talking honorable mention talent and some depth.
I am finally getting intrigued.
"Gravity cannot be held responsible for Tiger's fall." -- Albert Einstein
We will never know.
If Lickliter ever had any athletic players, with height, and experience, and more than one of them, what could he do?
USA #1
by Anonymous Hero on Jan 25, 2010 10:10 AM CST up reply actions
I think all but the height thing is emminently doable
not an entire team of athletes. Just a core set. The experience is inevitable. Think three more players like Eric May and Matt Gatens in terms of athleticism—but a guy who can break teams down off the dribble would be great. This guy Archie who’s injured might be a serviceable big guy, and Fuller is the whole package. Although, what is also clear to me is Lickliter needs to have three guys on his type of team that can play point guard, and two at a high level. Cully Payne is at best a come-off-the-bench quality Big Ten PG. If he were actually able to do that, Hawkeye nation would love him. He’d be a blast. But as THE man at PG, I don’t think so. He is a dribble rat who — at the Big Ten level — cannot create his own shot or create with the pass or defend anyone. He would be good enough against another Big Ten team’s second guard.
"Gravity cannot be held responsible for Tiger's fall." -- Albert Einstein
by StoopsMyAss on Jan 25, 2010 10:39 AM CST up reply actions
Who needs...
to create your own shot when you can hit the 3/4 court three bomb with regularity?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ur5xNtJiXjQ&feature=player_embedded
LOL
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Jan 25, 2010 8:54 PM CST up reply actions
Don't forget about the first half against Purdue
they actually had the lead at halftime in that one too. That makes three halves this year when Iowa has outscored a top 10 opponent (2 of which were top 5).
Official petition to add 1.5 wins to the Hawks record!
by HeroPatriotStanzi on Jan 25, 2010 12:01 PM CST up reply actions
I've been singing this exact song for the last month
3 more players, to put Cougill at the end of the rotation, Brommel (sp?) on the bench for the rest of his life, and Payne to backup PG, and suddenly Lick’s system starts working. The rough edges are all there, but this team is young and has no help. In two years, I see Lick making this team something worth watching.
by imadirtyoldman on Jan 25, 2010 1:44 PM CST up reply actions
Bawinkel and Brommer...
should be glued to the last two available chairs of each game. Yes, even if those chairs are in section GG, row 42 (yes, I used to sit not far from there). We only get out the solvent to remove the glue if we need Bawinkel to shoot some tech FTs.
I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
-- Judge Smails
by WaterlooChazz on Jan 25, 2010 8:51 PM CST up reply actions
With all due respect, Stoops . . .
I think it’s a bit early to relegate Payne to bench performer only.
He’s a freshman being forced to learn on the job. I think he has the raw tools to be a damn good point guard. He just needs to learn from his mistakes – which I think is happening.
Another thing I think many people are overlooking is – outside of the cheesburger scarfing machine that is Brennan Cougill – Iowa players work on strength training and conditioning appears to be showing up. The players look the part (to a man, they looked more ripped than the Hoosiers) and are now starting to PLAY the part of physically gifted basketball players.
I would not say he is a bench player
I’d say he is not a starter. He would be a very nice back-up PG. And that’s the point, there is no back-up. Even under Lickliter this is unusual. Freeman had Peterson, and Peterson had Kelly.
I always thought Jeff Horner was a good, but not great PG and, it seems to me, it would be a reach for Payne to play at his level. Maybe I am wrong, but that is what I see with him. He will never be a 12 point a night guy. His shot is not nearly good enough and he cannot drive the backet at all. He might become a 6 assist guy, and right now that would lead the Big Ten, but given the low point output it is not that special. He’s a specialist who is not great at his specialty. I think he is more one dimensional than Horner was even—Horner was a better defensive player and had a much better assist to turnover even in his freshman year. And he could drive to the hoop if really needed.
"Gravity cannot be held responsible for Tiger's fall." -- Albert Einstein
by StoopsMyAss on Jan 25, 2010 12:03 PM CST up reply actions
Storminspank had some good statistical comparisons re: Payne on another board
Conclusion: statistically compares well with Dean Oliver and Jeff Horner’s freshman years, with a little higher TO ratio. To be blamed on the level of talent around him? Inconclusive.
by YouCanPutYourEddsInIt on Jan 25, 2010 12:50 PM CST up reply actions
I've seen them
and I think the problem is those statistics do not tell you how much each player adds or takes away from the offense due to style of play. They also do not explain how much defensive pressure is relieved or added by their presence. Yes, Cully has stats that are in the ballpark of both those players. Well, with one exception, his assist/TO ration is abysmal. For a player who represents practically no threat offensively to be nad in A/TO is not good. He poses a match-up problem for the bad on defense, and he dribbles so much that we rarely see the kind of flow we saw with Oliver or Horner.
I like the guy. I really do. He just isn’t the answer at PG. He just isn’t.
"Gravity cannot be held responsible for Tiger's fall." -- Albert Einstein
I'm telling you guys...
if we beat OSU on Wednesday we are totally going to pull a schedule negative. It’s working out so far. Check it out on my icon.
Come on, OPS...
The first conference road win in just shy of 2 years, and we don’t even get to move our feet? Shameful.
I was thinking the exact same thing...
Okay, done nit-picking. Iowa just won. On the road. In the Big Ten. By double digits. This is a cause for celebration.
This is like reaching for the cookie jar and getting slapped in the hand by a ruler… ouch, Oops… ouch.
"I am in blood stepped in so far that should I wade no more, Returning were as tedious as go o’er." - Adrian Clayborn
by Smokin Herb Grigsby on Jan 25, 2010 1:36 PM CST up reply actions
A glaring oversight on my part. Sincere apologies.
I got more rhymes than Wade Lookingbill's got dunks
I also think it’s too early to say Cully is a back up PG. Definitely the toughest position, especially on a team that isn’t flush with talent. He has shown glimpses with both his shot and his ability to drive… It’s just been inconsistent. I was quite impressed with him taking advantage of being given the right hand drive and taking it for the score. It wasn’t especially fast, but it was a good decision and well executed.
I don’t know what he is capable of on defense. I think that’s the type of thing that can improve far beyond expectations with more experience. As far as offensive production; I could easily see him being an 11 and 6 type of player when it’s all said and done if they get some true scorers around him.
You actually get that type of production out of him, he’s a quality starting PG in the big ten.
by Wegher Please! on Jan 25, 2010 2:12 PM CST via mobile reply actions
11 ppg and 6 assts
is better than any Iowa PG in years. So I would be most happy with that if his asst to TO ration was in the 1.8 or 2.1 range and he was not a liability on defense. However, his minutes are so high right now that they will only go down next year, and thus his production will likely go down too. He needs to then become a 40+% FG shooter with a 2-1 asst to TO ratio and not be a liability on offense. That would keep his PPG at 8 or 9 and his assists would inch up to 5 and that in the 20 – 22 minute range.
To use an utterly weird analogy, he’s like a RB who get 80 yards a game on 28 carries with no runs longer than 6 yards. He lacks a threat and his averages are too low to be labeled sufficiently productive.
"Gravity cannot be held responsible for Tiger's fall." -- Albert Einstein
I meant "liability on defense"
he can’t really press anyone, which is another concern.
"Gravity cannot be held responsible for Tiger's fall." -- Albert Einstein

by 





















