Shocking take. Did not see this one coming at all.
Iowa State Daily article about Prohm and LW
- Thread starter dahliaclone
- Start date
Shocking take. Did not see this one coming at all.
I will also say the part I agree with more than anything was the regimented, don't sub until the first TV timeout approach. There were several games where you could tell about 2 minutes in what kind of game THT was about to have. There were games where we needed that spark earlier than the 4 minute mark. I just thought it was too regimented and not situation specific enough for my liking.
All the efficiency stats about LW are a fine n dandy argument if you ignore the fact it's not taking into the account the mental frustration of a 20 year old NBA prospect being forced to come off the bench. He was rushing to fit 36 minutes of expected stats into 27 minutes of playing time which often resulted in bad shots and passes.
I'm of the opinion this would not have been the case had he started and avoided the (feeling) of playing catch up all year. The single game he started in B12 play he had 17 points, 6 rebounds, 2 steals, and only 1 turnover.
I'm of the opinion this would not have been the case had he started and avoided the (feeling) of playing catch up all year. The single game he started in B12 play he had 17 points, 6 rebounds, 2 steals, and only 1 turnover.
Postseason minutes for THT and Wigginton...
Kansas City
Baylor... 35 THT, 22 LW
K-State... 25 THT, 29 LW
Kansas... 22 THT, 29 LW
Tulsa
TOSU... 15 THT, 29 LW
We all remember that Talen was red hot against Baylor, but not so much in the other games on the schedule. Prohm varied his rotations between the two appropriately, and Wigginton was in the game at the end of both of them, which one could argue is more critical.
Prohm started the halves the same way, but he varied it from there to the point Wigginton ultimately played more minutes (and more minutes overall in the Big 12).
The idea that he was inflexible is silly. He was quite apt about riding the hot hand.
The idea a guy would significantly transform as a player because he is starting or not starting is ludicrous. Sometimes, you are what you are, the good and the flaws.
The simplicity angle taken by this writer and by some posters would be comical if it just ended there, but he and so many just keep on keeping on with this angle. This is a complicated thing - rather than imply that some have never played sports on here, as one of our famous "angry Andy Rooney" (that's the old crank from 60 Minutes, right?) posters does, it would probably be better to ask who has coached highly competitive teams. I expect most have played sports on here and some to high levels. I expect that fewer have coached and even fewer have coached highly competitive teams.
I won't put myself in that latter class, but just coaching through early teens in competitive situations, there's much more to consider than these simplistic notions that this writer and some like to throw out. I think I know a lot based on my experience, but I've questioned various moves by every coach we've had, and some just seem to be successful, convincing me that they know what they're doing and maybe I need to rethink some things... - e.g.,
- He's the most talented, so he should play the most - definitely gets you into the "playing time" equation, but there's much more to how a team works than just giving the best player the most minutes --> How do the players mesh? Who complements others? In our case, how many guys play hero ball and how many can I have in at one time...? And, don't even put Lard into this conversation, he'd have to be so difficult to coach, that it's surprising to me that he even got the minutes he did (obviously, has talent, but so much more to deal with, especially in a team sport)
- This is not golf, tennis, or even baseball, where an individual can do their own thing - how things fit as a team is a big deal
- I have no idea what I'd have done with playing time this year, with all those key guys out at the beginning of the year, and then trying to blend them in. Regardless of how strong the competition was, we were playing Power 5 schools, and you can't deny that the way we played on both O and D in Hawaii was outstanding. That doesn't mean it would easily continue into the conference. On the other hand, hero ball seemed to start during conference play. I'm not blaming this on LW. Clearly THT was at the top of this list. Marial, in less obvious way by taking slightly better shots, didn't do much passing once he got the ball, either. And, all three (including LW) had major turnover issues.
- So, I'll admit that I don't know what the best approach would have been. THT was so high and then so low. LW was so good on O at times but just wasn't a good enough ball-handler and just didn't play much D. Babb & TH were good with the ball but would rarely look at the hoop... there was a lot to sort out. My main complaint would be that I'd have preferred more of a "feel" approach to how much guys played - CSP did this for about the last 10 minutes of each half, but I'd have liked to seen less rigidity on bringing LW & Lard in at the 14-min mark of each half, including who started the 2nd half. But, I still think CSP has done a fine job and will do great things for us going forward.
I won't put myself in that latter class, but just coaching through early teens in competitive situations, there's much more to consider than these simplistic notions that this writer and some like to throw out. I think I know a lot based on my experience, but I've questioned various moves by every coach we've had, and some just seem to be successful, convincing me that they know what they're doing and maybe I need to rethink some things... - e.g.,
- He's the most talented, so he should play the most - definitely gets you into the "playing time" equation, but there's much more to how a team works than just giving the best player the most minutes --> How do the players mesh? Who complements others? In our case, how many guys play hero ball and how many can I have in at one time...? And, don't even put Lard into this conversation, he'd have to be so difficult to coach, that it's surprising to me that he even got the minutes he did (obviously, has talent, but so much more to deal with, especially in a team sport)
- This is not golf, tennis, or even baseball, where an individual can do their own thing - how things fit as a team is a big deal
- I have no idea what I'd have done with playing time this year, with all those key guys out at the beginning of the year, and then trying to blend them in. Regardless of how strong the competition was, we were playing Power 5 schools, and you can't deny that the way we played on both O and D in Hawaii was outstanding. That doesn't mean it would easily continue into the conference. On the other hand, hero ball seemed to start during conference play. I'm not blaming this on LW. Clearly THT was at the top of this list. Marial, in less obvious way by taking slightly better shots, didn't do much passing once he got the ball, either. And, all three (including LW) had major turnover issues.
- So, I'll admit that I don't know what the best approach would have been. THT was so high and then so low. LW was so good on O at times but just wasn't a good enough ball-handler and just didn't play much D. Babb & TH were good with the ball but would rarely look at the hoop... there was a lot to sort out. My main complaint would be that I'd have preferred more of a "feel" approach to how much guys played - CSP did this for about the last 10 minutes of each half, but I'd have liked to seen less rigidity on bringing LW & Lard in at the 14-min mark of each half, including who started the 2nd half. But, I still think CSP has done a fine job and will do great things for us going forward.
I love that you keep dropping facts and numbers out here in a sea of personal opinions. Same dudes here spouting off about how they feel and think with nothing to back it up are the same dudes complaining about shows like First Take on ESPN.
And gave up a wide open 3 seconds in the to the game, Huggy put him some ball screen action, he made the wrong choice and gave McCabe 3 points, which got him going for the rest of the night. We also were never competitive in that game, not sure I'd use it as an example of anything but it shows the people supporting Lindell only look at how many points he had. Why are his stats relevant? If he's as focused on them as you are, that explains even more about why he didn't start.
You’re doing this all wrong. Prohm is coaching his team to purposely lose. If he would have just let cam lard act however he wanted to act with no accountability (kind of like he needed to do with Jameel McKay, just let them not have any consequences for behavior), and played Lindell more than the 28 minutes he averaged (with no regard to having to be worked back into the lineup after a foot injury), and never taken him out, we would have won a lot more games.
We are back to the dark days of cyclone basketball. No end in sight.
Because the crew looks for simple answers designed to reflect negatively on the coach they hate.
#darkdaysofcyclonebasketball
Welcome to American sports and politics in 2019, my friend.
You could append "personal attacks" to the "personal opinions" codicil, too.
Wigginton was what he was -- with not much difference between his sophomore and freshman years. He was a volume scorer who could definitely fill it up (not quite at the same level of efficiency that Shayok could, though) and more consistent on offense than Talen, but he was a weaker defender than both entirely for mental reasons. He was usually the best athlete on the court at any given time. His issues on defense had to be mental or effort.
Trying to replace Nick or Tyrese, both guys being natural point guards and necessary to move the ball and play defense around the other two guys being volume scorers, would have been a bad idea. You can only have so many chuckers out there. You need to win at the other phases of the game, too. Wigginton's PG skills -- a career 1:1 ATR -- left much to be desired. I feel that Lindell is always going to be a SG trapped in a PG's body at the next level.
And those guys are, well, to quote Jackson Hoy...
Wigginton proved that he could score the ball as a freshman at Iowa State. However, he did not prove that he could do so efficiently, or that he could create for others at a high level, make smart decisions, or play competent defense. Essentially, he fits a player type that is a dime a dozen in the G League, overseas, or even throughout college basketball. It isn’t hard to find an athletic 6-foot-2.5 guard who can get buckets, especially if you’re willing to throw efficiency and non-scoring parts of the game out the window.
https://www.thestepien.com/2018/11/01/five-2019-prospects-still-need-earn-draft-hype/
Do not get me wrong -- he would be better than anybody we could possibly bring in for next season, and, ironically, a volume scorer or two (who can maintain reasonable efficiency while doing it) is a big need for next year. Either Wigginton or Horton-Tucker would instantly become the focus of the offense and a likely Big 12 POTY candidate if they returned. Wigginton could be Carsen Edwards (and an All-American) next season if he was a Cyclone.
I just do not get how you can say five more minutes per night of him would have made much of a difference, especially when you net out his drag on the defense.
Is it a travesty? No, but it could have definitely hurt Wigginton and the team as a whole because it could mess with chemistry and confidence knowing you can go from starter to bench just because you got injured. Also didn't help that Prohm kept saying he would start him and as he said was constantly apologizing. That probably messed with his head as well. I don't think he should have started over THT. I think if he was going to start, it should have been for Haliburton. I think Prohm mismanaged Wigginton this season and he admitted to it. Lindell himself said himself it messed with his head for a while. So that part shouldn't be controversial. He has admitted to these kinds of things in the past well. Like starting Holden too long instead of inserting Young into the starting lineup.
He also has a weird stubborn thing where he wouldn't bring in any subs until, like the article said, about the 14 minute mark even if the starters weren't playing well.
But would it have made a difference for the season if he had came back and started? I have no idea. Could have ended the same way. I think when of the best things about Prohm is he does admit to mistakes. He isn't perfect, no one is. Not even the best coaches are perfect.
Wouldn't you like to know. And it worked out great, I got to travel all around the country for 4 years playing sports.
I'm surprised you don't have it on your Facebook because you seem so proud of it. Instead you just have your Cubs, Hawkeyes and Kansas State stuff
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
That's some creepy stalker action right there.
It's not stalking. His identity was posted on here a long time ago and he's an Iowa fan pretending to be an ISU fan. Try to keep up
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Posting identities is creepy stalker action. Posting people's facebook stuff without their consent is creepy stalker action. Try to keep up and clean up.
Latest posts
-
-
-
Deion Sanders and his medical team will hold a press conference on Monday
- Latest: FriendlySpartan
-
