Womens Basketball: Looking Forward

[Bipolarcy]

If Cole becomes a starter, I wouldn't be surprised to see Lauren move to the 2 spot, and Cole play PG. I also wouldn't be shocked if Moody doesn't play the point, BF tends to like his PG's to be taller, and she would fit that mold.

I guess I'm missing something here. BF likes his PGs taller, and Moody fits that description, so you guess BF won't have Moody play PG?

2+2=5?

 

[mred]

Moody is 5'9". Mansfield is listed at 5'7" (some doubt she's even that tall) and Cole is 5'8". If Moody is a legit 5'9", that's not too bad. It's no Lacey, but it's the height Wilson and Medders were listed at.

 

[Tornado man]

Marist is #1 in the nation in fewest turnovers per game. ISU is #333 (dead last) in steals per game. Our defensive strategy works fine when a team lacks perimeter shooting, but Marist obviously wasn't that team. The same defensive strategy worked great the past two seasons because Stuckey and Lacey were both excellent perimeter defenders, but this team struggles to cover a team with as many options as Marist. We don't have the perimeter defensive talent we used to (not that we've ever had a whole lot) and that was as big an issue this season as any other shortcoming.

That goes back to quickness, athleticism, and recruiting. Stuckey and, to some extent Lacey, were able to defend their opponents closely on the perimeter, because they had had the quickness to keep guarding on the dribble drive.
We don't have that now. On defense, our players stand 4-5 ft.away from whomever has the ball, and extend an arm straight out, with a hand in the face. And Marist saw this and simply took the shots. It's obvious BF is afraid to guard too close, fearing getting beat off the dribble. Even Hallie plays the perimeter like this.
As far as pressuring full-court, I think it's more of a coaching philosophy than looking at a team's talent. Green Bay presses everyone, and do they have more quickness than us?

 

[NYCy]

That goes back to quickness, athleticism, and recruiting. Stuckey and, to some extent Lacey, were able to defend their opponents closely on the perimeter, because they had had the quickness to keep guarding on the dribble drive.
We don't have that now. On defense, our players stand 4-5 ft.away from whomever has the ball, and extend an arm straight out, with a hand in the face. And Fairfield saw this and simply took the shots. It's obvious BF is afraid to guard too close, fearing getting beat off the dribble. Even Hallie plays the perimeter like this.
As far as pressuring full-court, I think it's more of a coaching philosophy than looking at a team's talent. Green Bay presses everyone, and do they have more quickness than us?

I love how you called "Marist" "Fairfield" in your post...might have been intentional or perhaps a Freudian slip... I'd prefer to Call Marist Fairfield from now on just to twist the knife. Just like we call players by their knickname I want to call Marist, "FAIRFIELD." Those who follow this board closely will know the basis for this. (Hiii Ezell! We love you!)

Too bad we lost to Fairfield today but we're still a better program.

 

[NYCy]

That goes back to quickness, athleticism, and recruiting. Stuckey and, to some extent Lacey, were able to defend their opponents closely on the perimeter, because they had had the quickness to keep guarding on the dribble drive.
We don't have that now. On defense, our players stand 4-5 ft.away from whomever has the ball, and extend an arm straight out, with a hand in the face. And Fairfield saw this and simply took the shots. It's obvious BF is afraid to guard too close, fearing getting beat off the dribble. Even Hallie plays the perimeter like this.
As far as pressuring full-court, I think it's more of a coaching philosophy than looking at a team's talent. Green Bay presses everyone, and do they have more quickness than us?

I love how you called "Marist" "Fairfield" in your post...might have been intentional or perhaps a Freudian slip... I'd prefer to Call Marist Fairfield from now on just to twist the knife. Just like we call players by their knickname I want to call Marist, "FAIRFIELD." Those who follow this board closely will know the basis for this. (Hiii Ezell! We love you!)

Too bad we lost to Fairfield today but we're still a better program.

 

[Tornado man]

I love how you called "Marist" "Fairfield" in your post...might have been intentional or perhaps a Freudian slip... I'd prefer to Call Marist Fairfield from now on just to twist the knife. Just like we call players by their knickname I want to call Marist, "FAIRFIELD." Those who follow this board closely will know the basis for this. (Hiii Ezell! We love you!)

Too bad we lost to Fairfield today but we're still a better program.

Good one - you got me. Yeah, I think it because of "twittergate." Also, I wonder if Ezell gave BF that scouting report, and what was in it...

 

[acoustimac]

I like the anecdote that Pop called the "project" physical. If Pop thinks she's physical, then she must be really physical.

The comparison I've heard is that the "project" will remind us of the PArris twins in physical appearance and presence.

 

[woodie]

The comparison I've heard is that the "project" will remind us of the PArris twins in physical appearance and presence.

billy boy needs to recruit some speed!!!

 

[Frak]

I love how you called "Marist" "Fairfield" in your post...might have been intentional or perhaps a Freudian slip... I'd prefer to Call Marist Fairfield from now on just to twist the knife. Just like we call players by their knickname I want to call Marist, "FAIRFIELD." Those who follow this board closely will know the basis for this. (Hiii Ezell! We love you!)

Too bad we lost to Fairfield today but we're still a better program.

Wow, WBB smack? Really? Congrats, but ISU still IS a better program. Just not a better team this year.

For the OP, I think that Lacey covered up a lot of faults in the guard court these past few years and that was exposed this season. BF better remedy that situation or things won't be any better next year in the best WBB league in the country.

 

[Bipolarcy]

Moody is 5'9". Mansfield is listed at 5'7" (some doubt she's even that tall) and Cole is 5'8". If Moody is a legit 5'9", that's not too bad. It's no Lacey, but it's the height Wilson and Medders were listed at.

I know how tall Moody is, but the other post still doesn't make sense because, unless I'm reading it wrong (and I've read it like 5 times now) he's saying Moody is NOT going to play PG anyway: "I also wouldn't be shocked if Moody doesn't play the point, BF tends to like his PG's to be taller, and she would fit that mold."

 

[mred]

I know how tall Moody is, but the other post still doesn't make sense because, unless I'm reading it wrong (and I've read it like 5 times now) he's saying Moody is NOT going to play PG anyway: "I also wouldn't be shocked if Moody doesn't play the point, BF tends to like his PG's to be taller, and she would fit that mold."

I was just throwing additional info out there. Moody is neither tall nor short, which adds one more layer of confusion about the quote that is confusing you. I agree with you.

 

[twistedredbird]

We have four players coming in. One is a project at best. From what I've been able to figure out we, at best, can expect (or hope) 1 or 2 of them to contribute. Should upgrade the athleticism of the team quite a bit, but scoring will still be a major concern.

First, have you seen this "project" play?

project....people said Pop was a project too and a recruiting miss by BF. project? you mean someone who backed out of an offer from another top 25 team?

Right now, to compete in the Big 12 we need better athletes. BF and company are some of the best coaches to teach skills. We of course need shooters, but if we don't want to quickly fall to the cellar of the Big 12 going forward, we need athletes. The days of recruiting finesse players needs to be behind us if we want to move forward.

I for one think the best recruiting class we have ever gotten is setting foot on campus this year. I applaud BF for stepping up his game and hitting Texas hard.

Part of the reason we lost yesterday is that we are in a team of transition. Marist yesterday looked like we used to several years ago, but that Marist team was exhausted by the end of the game, and we were clearly in better physical condition. Marist is great team for what they are, but that team would be fodder in the Big East, SEC, or Big 12 playing an unrelenting schedule. Just as we have seen our finesse players pushed around over the last few years. We have just lucked out we had some tough players, like Niz, Aus, and Ezell, and enough luck to hit threes in big games.

We need physical players. That is where the big league teams are headed. If we want a final four, we need athletes first. A lot less of the physical play is being called fouls in the Women's game. That's a discussion for another thread. BF sees this, and has shared this. Pop, Hallie, Jess, and to some extent Anna are steps in the right direction. This incoming class is adding to that.

Along with athletes, we need at least one player that can take someone off the dribble and shoot the three. Right now, Mansfield can do that to some extent. Jess is quicker, but needs to just keep taking shots. I have high hopes for Moody and Williamson to bring that penetration we need from our guards. That athleticism will also add a great deal to our defense as well because our dribble penetration defense is the worst in the Big 12.

We have certainly had our misses with our recruiting lately, but the issue with those misses have been mostly because they were not physical or tough enough for this league, not the reverse.

Would Williams have helped us this year. Possibly. But she is better suited for a high-level mid major team like Marist or TCU.

Our next incoming class is off to a great start with the Kidd as well.

 

[TCG]

First, have you seen this "project" play?

project....people said Pop was a project too and a recruiting miss by BF. project? you mean someone who backed out of an offer from another top 25 team?

Right now, to compete in the Big 12 we need better athletes. BF and company are some of the best coaches to teach skills. We of course need shooters, but if we don't want to quickly fall to the cellar of the Big 12 going forward, we need athletes. The days of recruiting finesse players needs to be behind us if we want to move forward.

I for one think the best recruiting class we have ever gotten is setting foot on campus this year. I applaud BF for stepping up his game and hitting Texas hard.

Part of the reason we lost yesterday is that we are in a team of transition. Marist yesterday looked like we used to several years ago, but that Marist team was exhausted by the end of the game, and we were clearly in better physical condition. Marist is great team for what they are, but that team would be fodder in the Big East, SEC, or Big 12 playing an unrelenting schedule. Just as we have seen our finesse players pushed around over the last few years. We have just lucked out we had some tough players, like Niz, Aus, and Ezell, and enough luck to hit threes in big games.

We need physical players. That is where the big league teams are headed. If we want a final four, we need athletes first. A lot less of the physical play is being called fouls in the Women's game. That's a discussion for another thread. BF sees this, and has shared this. Pop, Hallie, Jess, and to some extent Anna are steps in the right direction. This incoming class is adding to that.

Along with athletes, we need at least one player that can take someone off the dribble and shoot the three. Right now, Mansfield can do that to some extent. Jess is quicker, but needs to just keep taking shots. I have high hopes for Moody and Williamson to bring that penetration we need from our guards. That athleticism will also add a great deal to our defense as well because our dribble penetration defense is the worst in the Big 12.

We have certainly had our misses with our recruiting lately, but the issue with those misses have been mostly because they were not physical or tough enough for this league, not the reverse.

Would Williams have helped us this year. Possibly. But she is better suited for a high-level mid major team like Marist or TCU.

Our next incoming class is off to a great start with the Kidd as well.

Totaly agree, we need physical players and athetic players and thats what our new recruits look like. And I also think that it's a step in the right direction.

 

[NYCy]

Twistedredbird thanks for your astute analysis as always. The game is changing indeed and I agree with you.... I think it's interesting that almost every team in the Big XII now has recruited a 6'6"+ player to attempt to compete with Baylor/Griner. A&M's coach commented on that recently, that everybody's gotta have a "BIG" to compete.

It does seem like some kind of transitional identity crisis between the ISU teams of yesteryear and a new-look for the future of the Big XII being forced on us by the more athletic teams in the South.

I give Fennelly a lot of credit for seeing the change in the Big XII and immediately getting 4 players from Texas. Meanwhile, Baylor, A&M and Texas basically cleaned up all the top 50 recruits in Texas and we got the lesser-known Texas players (except Moody and Kidd), but who we hope are hidden gems.

But I do have one honest question: What if we do NOT recruit the big time athletes and instead just recruit a bunch of great-3-point-shooting interchangeable parts like the ISU teams of 1999-2001? (e.g. Frese, Gahan, Taylor, et al). Why do we NEED to be as athletic as the other schools, does that work in Fennelly's scripted offensive schemes? Are we getting away from what made us successful in the first place? Weren't we at our best (1999-2001) winning championships when we had more of the average-athletes-but-who-were-great-shooters-interchangeable-parts? Is there a fear that if we did that we would effectively look like a Marist, a Green Bay, or a South Dakota State? A disciplined "sytem-oriented" high mid-major program without the muscle to really compete for championships?

I'm asking because I honestly don't know and want to hear what you think --- I'm not trying to be snarky in any way. I'll support whomever Fennelly recruits.

 

[jbhtexas]

I give Fennelly a lot of credit for seeing the change in the Big XII and immediately getting 4 players from Texas.

This "change" to more phyiscal play started almost a decade ago, and has been painfully obvious for the last 5 years. Frankly, if BF is first seeing this change now, he is rather late to the party. IMO BF has been well aware of the "change", but he was hopeful that he could somehow maintain success without going that route. At least that's how I interpret some of his interviews.

But I do have one honest question: What if we do NOT recruit the big time athletes and instead just recruit a bunch of great-3-point-shooting interchangeable parts like the ISU teams of 1999-2001? (e.g. Frese, Gahan, Taylor, et al). Why do we NEED to be as athletic as the other schools, does that work in Fennelly's scripted offensive schemes? Are we getting away from what made us successful in the first place? Weren't we at our best (1999-2001) winning championships when we had more of the average-athletes-but-who-were-great-shooters-interchangeable-parts? Is there a fear that if we did that we would effectively look like a Marist, a Green Bay, or a South Dakota State? A disciplined "sytem-oriented" high mid-major program without the muscle to really compete for championships?

Athletic defenders can shut down less-athletic perimeter shooters if there is no threat of being taken off the dribble. Athletic defenders will ball-hawk less athletic players and wear them down physically. It's exactly what happened to ISU's men's team under the previous coach. It is very rare at the major conference level for teams with average athletic ability to have sustained success against teams with high athletic ability.

 

[cykadelic2]

We need physical players. That is where the big league teams are headed. If we want a final four, we need athletes first. A lot less of the physical play is being called fouls in the Women's game. That's a discussion for another thread. BF sees this, and has shared this. Pop, Hallie, Jess, and to some extent Anna are steps in the right direction. This incoming class is adding to that.

We have certainly had our misses with our recruiting lately, but the issue with those misses have been mostly because they were not physical or tough enough for this league, not the reverse.

Don't get too wrapped up in solely recruiting athletic physical players. The primary issue with this season's team was a glaring lack of offensive skills, namely shooting. Schroll is Exhibit A. She is athletic enough to play in the B12 but she can't shoot it nor is she effective off the dribble. Cole is another example. Those two had to play way too many minutes and that stifled the offense with their offensive limitations.

This season's team was one of BF's best man defensive teams due, in part, to athletes like Poppens and Bolte. It's the main reason they made the tournament but don't recruit more athleticism at the expense of skill.

Bill needs more scorers and shooters to get better.

 

[twistedredbird]

Twistedredbird thanks for your astute analysis as always. The game is changing indeed and I agree with you.... I think it's interesting that almost every team in the Big XII now has recruited a 6'6"+ player to attempt to compete with Baylor/Griner. A&M's coach commented on that recently, that everybody's gotta have a "BIG" to compete.

It does seem like some kind of transitional identity crisis between the ISU teams of yesteryear and a new-look for the future of the Big XII being forced on us by the more athletic teams in the South.

I give Fennelly a lot of credit for seeing the change in the Big XII and immediately getting 4 players from Texas. Meanwhile, Baylor, A&M and Texas basically cleaned up all the top 50 recruits in Texas and we got the lesser-known Texas players (except Moody and Kidd), but who we hope are hidden gems.

But I do have one honest question: What if we do NOT recruit the big time athletes and instead just recruit a bunch of great-3-point-shooting interchangeable parts like the ISU teams of 1999-2001? (e.g. Frese, Gahan, Taylor, et al). Why do we NEED to be as athletic as the other schools, does that work in Fennelly's scripted offensive schemes? Are we getting away from what made us successful in the first place? Weren't we at our best (1999-2001) winning championships when we had more of the average-athletes-but-who-were-great-shooters-interchangeable-parts? Is there a fear that if we did that we would effectively look like a Marist, a Green Bay, or a South Dakota State? A disciplined "sytem-oriented" high mid-major program without the muscle to really compete for championships?

I'm asking because I honestly don't know and want to hear what you think --- I'm not trying to be snarky in any way. I'll support whomever Fennelly recruits.

Well, we either have to go one way or another. The players who are both incredibly athletic and high skill sets, are going to the top tier programs. A lot of mid-majors have copied the ISU way, and it works for them, with the possibility of upsets, but I don't see the ISU way of old really working well in the Big 12 going forward. Of course it appears that our next year's class has some of both, which is good.

I think that would be a good question for BF.

 

[twistedredbird]

Don't get too wrapped up in solely recruiting athletic physical players. The primary issue with this season's team was a glaring lack of offensive skills, namely shooting. Schroll is Exhibit A. She is athletic enough to play in the B12 but she can't shoot it nor is she effective off the dribble. Cole is another example. Those two had to play way too many minutes and that stifled the offense with their offensive limitations.

This season's team was one of BF's best man defensive teams due, in part, to athletes like Poppens and Bolte. It's the main reason they made the tournament but don't recruit more athleticism at the expense of skill.

Bill needs more scorers and shooters to get better.

Our incoming class appears to have 3 guards who can both shoot and have dribble penetration, and are athletic.

Jess actually is a great penetrator, so I disagree with your comment about her not being able off the dribble. Being consistent, and not afraid to shoot the 3, will help her game a lot.

We played good defense, but hardly anyone on this team could guard dribble penetration well. We need quicker players to do that.

 

[cykadelic2]

Our incoming class appears to have 3 guards who can both shoot and have dribble penetration, and are athletic.

Moody for sure, but I question whether Williamson and Ellis are skilled at dribble penetration. It would help immensely if Vanloo decides on ISU, then you have a guard trio of Vanloo, Moody, and Mansfield which would be a clear upgrade over this past season's backcourt rotation (which was hurt badly by the Rockall, Williams, and Yackley busts).

I can see Hallie C playing more 3 than 4 next season but BF will need to play mostly zone with her at the 3. She will have to play the 3 if Williamson or Ellis aren't ready to go as FR and if Schroll still can't shoot.

 

[BoxsterCy]

I don't have much to add here, just wanted to say this is a pretty good thread with a number of you posting some good observations and opinions.

Looking forward to next year. I hope we have everyone back and don't have any transfers.