Fred: "The wins will come... I promise that"

**CyCloned** · 02-24-2011, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by trajanJ

If fatigue is such a big deal how do you explain some of the Duke teams that would play only 7 guys the entire game and their point guard would play 40 minutes, and they won the National Championship doing that?

Even if Duke only played 7 or 8 guys, they were 7 or 8 very good guys on a highly regarded team. Do you think that ISU would have won a coupel more games with one of Duke's all american post players on the team? Have you ever watched a Duke game? Anyone from Duke gets bumped it is a foul, game stops, shoot some free throws. Without any inside game at all ISU has only one way to play, and it does not generate a lot of fouls, or standing around. The only way that ISU has a chance in the conference games is to just out hustle the other team and hope to make enough 3 pointers to win. It has been hard and frustrating to watch, but I have no doubt everyone is doing all they can to win.

**VeloClone** · 02-24-2011, 09:07 AM

Originally Posted by trajanJ

If fatigue is such a big deal how do you explain some of the Duke teams that would play only 7 guys the entire game and their point guard would play 40 minutes, and they won the National Championship doing that?

Eustachy's two best teams didn't go very deep either but Eustachy's practices, especially pre-season, were not the norm. Remember a certain point guard who ******* that he "didn't come here on a ******* track scholarship"? Larry was lucky that he didn't lose Mel before he ever played a game in Cardinal and Gold. Eustacy's team hardly touched a ball during their first few weeks of practice. He had the luxury of knowing that there all ready was enough offensive firepower on the squad (especially with Tinsley creating) that they could concentrate on conditioning and defense.

In addition - and this is a hugely overlooked part of this argument - the teams that we are looking at had the depth, they just rarely used it. You have to be a lot more careful about limiting practice injuries for example if you don't have very many bodies you can put into that small rotation if one or two go down. Limiting the chance of practice injuries means limiting practice and game speed conditioning suffers. Eustachy's 99-00 team had a player lost for about a third of the season but another was able to step right in to that tight rotation with really no change in production.

**atlantacyclone** · 02-24-2011, 09:10 AM

I still think that we will lose the rest of the games in the regular season... then win out the Big 12 tourney and move on!

**irishclone** · 02-24-2011, 09:18 AM

There are 9 games we could have won if we had just one good post player/wing. While losing these games is heart breaking, it's encouraging to see just how close we are to winning these games given the short bench we have. Makes me feel like the staff knows what they are doing, even though they can't implement everything they would like. And I love the attitude of the guys that can't play this year. They are chomping at the bit to get out there next year and show what they can do. They should hit the floor running.

**CyJack13** · 02-24-2011, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by VeloClone

Eustachy's two best teams didn't go very deep either but Eustachy's practices, especially pre-season, were not the norm. Remember a certain point guard who ******* that he "didn't come here on a ******* track scholarship"? Larry was lucky that he didn't lose Mel before he ever played a game in Cardinal and Gold. Eustacy's team hardly touched a ball during their first few weeks of practice. He had the luxury of knowing that there all ready was enough offensive firepower on the squad (especially with Tinsley creating) that they could concentrate on conditioning and defense.

In addition - and this is a hugely overlooked part of this argument - the teams that we are looking at had the depth, they just rarely used it. You have to be a lot more careful about limiting practice injuries for example if you don't have very many bodies you can put into that small rotation if one or two go down. Limiting the chance of practice injuries means limiting practice and game speed conditioning suffers. Eustachy's 99-00 team had a player lost for about a third of the season but another was able to step right in to that tight rotation with really no change in production.

It's not that the 99-00 team was in better shape than this team, they were just more talented. No matter who are, if you have a short rotation, guys are going to get tired. The difference is the current team is extremely average to begin with, and when they get tired they aren't going to get better. The 99-00 team had two of the top 15 players in the country, when they got tired, they were still better than almost all their opponents. There's also the strength issue, the 99-00 team was one of the strongest in the country, this team, not so much. So yes the lack of depth hurts, but the lack of talent is the biggest issue.

**Cydkar** · 02-24-2011, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by ItsCYence

Next Topic give me a number 0-14, 0 meaning no chance and 14 meaning metaphysical certitude, Royce White will be the biggest performer on the cyclones basketball team next yearrr.

I expect Royce to be a piece to a well-balanced puzzle but certainly not dominant.

**VeloClone** · 02-24-2011, 09:30 AM

Originally Posted by CyJack13

It's not that the 99-00 team was in better shape than this team, they were just more talented.

Yes, they were more talented, but they were also in better shape. Mike Nurse commented a couple of times (including after a multiple OT game, I believe) that they never had a problem with their wind on game day because even the toughest games were easier than their practices. Game days were like having a day off.

I always loved Mike's comments.

I think the killer practices hurt the team the following year. You could see at the end of the Big 12 season the fatigue was setting in. You all know what happened in the Big 12 tourney and the NCAA's that year...

**psi** · 02-24-2011, 10:57 AM

Originally Posted by VeloClone

... Mike Nurse commented a couple of times (including after a multiple OT game, I believe) that they never had a problem with their wind on game day because even the toughest games were easier than their practices.

What do you expect from a guy who plays after he gets hit by a truck.

**trajanJ** · 02-24-2011, 11:53 AM

Originally Posted by CyCloned

Even if Duke only played 7 or 8 guys, they were 7 or 8 very good guys on a highly regarded team. Do you think that ISU would have won a coupel more games with one of Duke's all american post players on the team? Have you ever watched a Duke game? Anyone from Duke gets bumped it is a foul, game stops, shoot some free throws. Without any inside game at all ISU has only one way to play, and it does not generate a lot of fouls, or standing around. The only way that ISU has a chance in the conference games is to just out hustle the other team and hope to make enough 3 pointers to win. It has been hard and frustrating to watch, but I have no doubt everyone is doing all they can to win.

Yes I think ISU would have won a lot more games with Duke talent. But I'm not talking about winning a NC. I'm talking about winning home games against weak teams like OU and Tech. Those are winnable games even with the current ISU talent and some of that has to go on coaching. If another coach that wasn't a cyclone legend had taken the job and had the same results there would be a lot more complaining.

**jdoggivjc** · 02-24-2011, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by trajanJ

Yes I think ISU would have won a lot more games with Duke talent. But I'm not talking about winning a NC. I'm talking about winning home games against weak teams like OU and Tech. Those are winnable games even with the current ISU talent and some of that has to go on coaching. If another coach that wasn't a cyclone legend had taken the job and had the same results there would be a lot more complaining.

Must be nice viewing our situation through Jayhawk glasses, when a "down" year would be considered making the NCAA Tournament with anything lower than a 5 seed. Considering the last time Kansas missed the NCAA Tournament was 1989 and the last time they had to perform an extensive overhaul to their program was 1976-1980 (and they even made an NCAA Tournament appearance in that stretch), I don't exactly think ANY Kansas fan is particularly "qualified" to give "advice" to fans who are presently experiencing a lengthy rebuilding process.

So, as far as I'm concerned, you and your "well, ISU should be doing a lot better with the talent they have if Hoiberg were truly a good coach" opinion can go run along now, because, even if Self is a better coach than Hoiberg, I can guarantee you wouldn't trade the talent you have for the talent we unfortunately were stuck to work with this season, not to mention I guarantee Self wouldn't do nearly as well with the talent Hoiberg has to work with as you think he would.

**trajanJ** · 02-24-2011, 12:50 PM

Not saying they should do a lot better. Just saying that if he wasn't Fred he would probably be taking more criticism. I think it would be extremely hard to win with the talent he inherited. It was a great hire because ISU had struggled and they could take a risk on someone that has never coached before. If it doesn't work out, then they are not in any worse shape. If he ends up a great coach, you have someone that won't use the job as a stepping stone. That makes it well worth the risk. To me it's a no brainer, but I would like to have seen him draw up something with a little more imagination at the end of some of those close games instead of running an iso with Garrett every time.

Next year you will be able to judge his coaching because he will have the talent to compete in this conference and the conference could possibly be way down. If Texas and KU lose some players to the league this conference will be a toss-up every night with no superior teams.

**Cyforce** · 02-24-2011, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by VeloClone

Eustachy's two best teams didn't go very deep either but Eustachy's practices, especially pre-season, were not the norm. Remember a certain point guard who ******* that he "didn't come here on a ******* track scholarship"? Larry was lucky that he didn't lose Mel before he ever played a game in Cardinal and Gold. Eustacy's team hardly touched a ball during their first few weeks of practice. He had the luxury of knowing that there all ready was enough offensive firepower on the squad (especially with Tinsley creating) that they could concentrate on conditioning and defense.

In addition - and this is a hugely overlooked part of this argument - the teams that we are looking at had the depth, they just rarely used it. You have to be a lot more careful about limiting practice injuries for example if you don't have very many bodies you can put into that small rotation if one or two go down. Limiting the chance of practice injuries means limiting practice and game speed conditioning suffers. Eustachy's 99-00 team had a player lost for about a third of the season but another was able to step right in to that tight rotation with really no change in production.

the only injuries I remember were Shirley and Rancik. They basically shared the same roll and their injuries didn't overlap. I think the team would of struggled without Tinsley, Horton, Nurse or Fizer.