The opposing take on ISU

Seth Davis asked 2 coaches from each league for their take on the best teams in the conference, mostly looking for weaknesses. Interesting read on everybody but here is the ISU blurb:

Quote:

---

Iowa State: The Cyclones are deceptively talented, but they can be lulled to sleep and get disinterested, particularly Royce White. He is an Anthony Mason-type player, a distributor and a facilitator. He's just so talented that he gets bored out there sometimes. Then all of a sudden he's like, now I'm going to play. Then he'll make five plays that nobody in the country at his size can make. I like Chris Allen, but Scott Christopherson is the guy on the perimeter for them. I think a team that can get out and make shots would give them trouble. White is good inside, but that's not what he wants to do. He wants style points. He wants to show he can handle the ball and throw a behind-the-back pass. It also hurts them because he handles the ball so much, yet he misses free throws. Then they bring in Melvin Ejim, who's 6-6, and Anthony Booker, who's 6-9 but wants to shoot threes. So they don't have much inside besides Royce.

---

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1nzIFvG7U

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EggMcClone

Seth Davis asked 2 coaches from each league for their take on the best teams in the conference, mostly looking for weaknesses. Interesting read on everybody but here is the ISU blurb:

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/201...#ixzz1nzIFvG7U

---

That's a pretty fair assessment, I'd say.

Some seems a little overblown, in that Booker and Royce seem pretty willing to go inside.

I would never argue against the word "disinterested." That seemed to happen to our team overall a few times this year, and you can see it still, just less dramatically.

Pretty fair assessment, though. I'm almost arguing a technicality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MNCyGuy

That's a pretty fair assessment, I'd say.

---

yeah, that's pretty accurate, imho.

Wisconsin gets some great comments in that link.

Spot on, I'd say. I don't mind Booker shooting three's if he's wide open though. He's shown he can make them...Ejim on the other hand.....

Yea pretty fair, it has been nice to see Melvin slow down on chucking up threes and actually moving inside with and without the ball. It's showing in his production the last few games.

I don't necessarily disagree with it, it just isn't what I would prioritize if I were only writing a paragraph about ISU. Of course, I'm biased and have my own perspective.

Why is the Pac-12 featured on here? :jimlad:

Ejim is a good jump shooter with the mid range stuff out to about 18 feet. I've like the past couple of games how he has driven more. Plus hes a good FT shooter.

I think that's a far write-up but I think it unfairly takes a shot at Booker. Dude makes it rain from 3, he can shoot it as many times as he want's if he's got a good look.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by khaal53

I don't necessarily disagree with it, it just isn't what I would prioritize if I were only writing a paragraph about ISU. Of course, I'm biased and have my own perspective.

---

to be fair, i think they were asked to only point out weaknesses....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Architect

I think that's a far write-up but I think it unfairly takes a shot at Booker. Dude makes it rain from 3, he can shoot it as many times as he want's if he's got a good look.

---

That's key. If he has time to spot up and go through his full motion he is deadly. It doesn't seem to matter how open Ejim is or how much time they give him, he is still only going shoot in the low20's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RayShimley

That's key. If he has time to spot up and go through his full motion he is deadly. It doesn't seem to matter how open Ejim is or how much time they give him, he is still only going shoot in the low20's.

---

I like what Melvin brings, but every time he's open on the outside, I find myself yelling "YOU'RE THIS WIDE OPEN FOR A REASON!" at the TV.

I agree with other comments here, it's a fair assessment.

It does seem a little more like "here are the team's weaknesses" as opposed to a balance of strength-weakness. Maybe the entire article has that tone.

Still, one line jumped out at me "I think a team that can get out and make shots would give them trouble."

That seems like a no-brainer that could apply to any team, but I've noticed this season that if an ISU opponent can't nail shots with consistency throughout a game, they're screwed. Iowa State will not lose to those teams. Hit some big shots here & there, it's a different matter.

Something that's easy to take for granted, but which we shouldn't: Iowa State is included in a story with a headline "The inside scoop on the nation's top teams."

Read that again, then think back about 23 months. Or even 12 months.

Or even 3.