2024-25 Roster/Rotation Additions

bawbie

Moderator
Staff member
Mar 17, 2006
52,886
43,133
113
Cedar Rapids, IA
Have you ever watched her play and shoot the ball?
PS sorry I forgot the h on her name
Seriously, they are in no way similar.

Hannah was a D2 player who came up a level and turned into an excellent shooter. It's a great story, but we were basically her only option to play at this level.

Amoore is a two-time All-ACC point guard who has been one of the best players in the country for several years and is the consensus best player in the transfer portal. She's a good shooter (the only similarity), but she's also an Emily Ryan level point guard. It's not a "hey, lets get Amoore to replace Hannah!" or a "if that's what you want". It would be like Jamal Shead transferring from Houston and saying "he'd be nice, if that's what we want"
 

acoustimac

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2009
7,083
7,703
113
Lamoni, IA
Seriously, they are in no way similar.

Hannah was a D2 player who came up a level and turned into an excellent shooter. It's a great story, but we were basically her only option to play at this level.

Amoore is a two-time All-ACC point guard who has been one of the best players in the country for several years and is the consensus best player in the transfer portal. She's a good shooter (the only similarity), but she's also an Emily Ryan level point guard. It's not a "hey, lets get Amoore to replace Hannah!" or a "if that's what you want". It would be like Jamal Shead transferring from Houston and saying "he'd be nice, if that's what we want"
I agree on most…but Hannah didn’t turn into an excellent shooter…that’s what generated interest in the first place. She already was an excellent shooter.
 

Cyforce

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 24, 2009
15,865
12,212
113
Des Moines
I agree on most…but Hannah didn’t turn into an excellent shooter…that’s what generated interest in the first place. She already was an excellent shooter.
Besides Petty and King would be much better fits for us. Besides Ryan we have Jackson and the Indiana recruit ready to follow. As someone that follows the team so closely i think you'll agree Brown serves us better at the 3. Adding a PF should be a priority.
 
  • Like
Reactions: acoustimac

acoustimac

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2009
7,083
7,703
113
Lamoni, IA
Besides Petty and King would be much better fits for us. Besides Ryan we have Jackson and the Indiana recruit ready to follow. As someone that follows the team so closely Brown serves us better at the 3. Adding a PF should be a priority.
Agree 100% here…one that can shoot from deep and power inside
 

BoxsterCy

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 14, 2009
43,960
40,634
113
Minnesota
Lots of talk about the 4 and a "power forward". Have we ever really had a true power forward? How many WBB teams do? We've had some good rebounding forwards but almost all were undersized and a mix of players that were really small forwards or big guards. Those were the type of players that fit our style. Is a 1,2,3,4,5 for positions even relevant for most NCAA WBB teams? I get it would be ideal if we had a Hannah Stuekle to play next to Crooks and Brown but it hasn't been something we've had. Maybe the closest was Hallie Christofferson?
 
  • Like
Reactions: savepolarbears

Cyforce

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Nov 24, 2009
15,865
12,212
113
Des Moines
Lots of talk about the 4 and a "power forward". Have we ever really had a true power forward? How many WBB teams do? We've had some good rebounding forwards but almost all were undersized and a mix of players that were really small forwards or big guards. Those were the type of players that fit our style. Is a 1,2,3,4,5 for positions even relevant for most NCAA WBB teams? I get it would be ideal if we had a Hannah Stuekle to play next to Crooks and Brown but it hasn't been something we've had. Maybe the closest was Hallie Christofferson?
Bristow was an ideal 4 with Crooks, she just needed to add some strength. My point was Brown isn't that player. As we saw in the Stanford game Brown was the victim of well we're not going to call it on the perceived stars so she got the calls but was being asked to guard down low which isn't her strength.
 

BoxsterCy

Moderator
Staff member
Sep 14, 2009
43,960
40,634
113
Minnesota
Bristow was an ideal 4 with Crooks, she just needed to add some strength. My point was Brown isn't that player. As we saw in the Stanford game Brown was the victim of well we're not going to call it on the perceived stars so she got the calls but was being asked to guard down low which isn't her strength.

That part I do get. Our small forward/guard lineup is pretty good on the offense side, not so much on the defense versus some teams, especially with Crooks having limitations on what we can expect from her on defense.

Will be interesting to see where Bristow ends up and what she's asked to do on that team. Might be she didn't want to be a 4 and wants to be the 3.
 

isucy86

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2006
7,919
6,480
113
Dubuque
Lots of talk about the 4 and a "power forward". Have we ever really had a true power forward? How many WBB teams do? We've had some good rebounding forwards but almost all were undersized and a mix of players that were really small forwards or big guards. Those were the type of players that fit our style. Is a 1,2,3,4,5 for positions even relevant for most NCAA WBB teams? I get it would be ideal if we had a Hannah Stuekle to play next to Crooks and Brown but it hasn't been something we've had. Maybe the closest was Hallie Christofferson?
I'd take a Chelsea Poppens or Kristen Scott Clone.
 

NWICY

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2012
29,527
24,969
113
The portal tracker I follow says Mary Kate King has entered the portal. Nothing of note playing wise, but maybe wants to play somewhere?

Dang did she graduate this yr? I'm drawing a blank on on Senior night.