*** Official #15 IOWA STATE vs #18 Texas Tech Game(Day) Thread ***

[Cyinthenorth]

Id be careful of qb 2 syndrome here... He came in as a guy who wasn't scouted by the opposition x and therefore did well in garbage time minutes. Nott sure that translates.

Tbh if this was a prohm team, I'd be wondering about these decisions... But tj has given me full reason to trust him.

He would have quite a bit of tape from last year when he played quite a bit. Throwing him out there for a spark when the game was out of reach was a zero sum scenario for TJ. Not giving Tre a few more minutes when the game was still teetering in the balance was a little strange

 

[HFCS]

they arent getting 15 more attempts...it'a 41 more MADE free throws on the road....that's not normal

I agree. They’re also getting WILDLY greater attempts at an abnormal clip.

16 more attempts for OU, 23 more attempts for Tech last night. Against OU we’d have had 0 attempts if they hadn’t done makeup calls in the final minute, they called 3 quick ones to get us one free throw that we missed.

We did get 13 more attempts vs Baylor but they at least had 14 fts unlike our basically 0 vs OU.

 

[HFCS]

My question: do ISU's players have the ability to really drive aggressively and dictate movement?

It's like wanting ISU football to run WR screens..there's a reason other teams make it look easy.

Against OU Hunter and IB were the only players on either team really attacking the rim. OU was chucking desperation jumpers and we dominated them aggressively for 30 minutes. They had 12 ft atttmpts to our 0 when the game flipped to their favor even though ISU had been the attacking team.

 

[Halincandenza]

Funny that Tech is better than Texas this year. But they definitely have the best defense in the country with the way the officiating is this year. But it will be interesting to see how they fair in the tournament. Seems those games are always officiated differently. It has hurt WVU for years.

 

[Cyinthenorth]

For those of us who were around 20+ years ago, the big FT disparity was a way of life with the good Eustachy teams...except it was ISU shooting all the FTs.

There's the way it should be ideally, and the way it plays out in reality. By rule, certain things, like displacing a guy should always be a foul. But in reality, as several others have pointed out, the fouls don't get called unless the offensive player is being aggressive and forcing action. I don't know why, but that's the way it is, and it has been this way for years.

ISU's offense is struggling with this right now, coaches and players alike. They are just too passive on offense when they are facing aggressive defenses, like we seem to see night in and night out in the Big 12. Until ISU gets it figured out, I think these ugly foul and FT numbers are going to continue. ISU has to change, because the officiating isn't.

Offensively this team reminds me --at times-- of the Prohm-led squad from a year ago. Having Hunter is about the only significant leg up this years team has compared to last. They don't play as much hero ball, but they can get every bit as stagnant and settle for poor % shots. The movement is generally better, but not in the 2H vs Tech (either time) or 2H against OU. It's almost like if they don't see the ball going through the hoop they slowly start to give up and get lazy on that side of the ball.

 

[HFCS]

[QUOTEm my nm

Yes, and 10 of those were from the freethrow line. There was one and 1 in there that doesn't count as points from FT line only.

In that time period TT scored 19 points from the FT line. We did score one from the line in that same time period, so that is only a deficit of 18 points. We lost how many points during that time? Down 1 to down 22 = 21 points. Yeah, I am going to stand by my assertion that the FT disparity had a lot to do with the loss.
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for posting this so I didn’t have to.

He calls out the time frame where foul disparity caused the game to get away from ISU then weaves a fairy tale that Tech played better offense, they played worse offense.

 

[mitten1975]

ISU shot horribly and probably wouldn’t have won either way but the officiating was horrible. It’s just out of control this year. Ruining the game and doesn’t make people want to watch when CBB should be trying to get more people to watch. They need to do something about it in the off-season. You can’t let this kind of ultra physical play continue. Then they punish the teams that aren’t as physical when they try to be.

This happens with a new coach. I didn't get to see the game because it was ESPNU but I have seen it many times.

 

[goody2012]

The offense was not fine against KU, and fell apart for the last 7 minutes of OU, which would make for issues in 4/6 games...

The Baylor game was .99 pts/poss (which you deemed fine), the KU game was .97 pts/poss. In an average possession game for us that's a 1 pt difference.

 

[Halincandenza]

It would be huge if ISU could get these next two games and get to .500 in the conference and pick up the first road win. The schedule after the SEC challenge game is much more favorable.

 

[HFCS]

It would be huge if ISU could get these next two games and get to .500 in the conference and pick up the first road win. The schedule after the SEC challenge game is much more favorable.

I think Tech, Baylor, and Refs/KU are the toughest outs. 4/6 of those behind us already.

OU we dominated for 30 minutes 8 vs 5 on the road. I think they’re a good team but we might destroy them at home if both teams are full strength.

I think every road game left is a good opportunity except maybe Baylor whom I don’t see dropping another one at home unless KU’s stripes get involved.

I get that the league is 9/10 teams deep but it’s been 7-9 teams deep every year since dead weight Neb/CU left.

 

[cygrads]

Looking at the team stats on ESPN if you didn't know the score you'd think it was a close game, until you get to fouls and free throws - advantage Tech at almost 3 to 1. Game was lost at free throw line.

 

[Neptune78]

The effort was there. Shot selection will continue to evolve. Hopefully Caleb, Jaz, and Tre are given more plays to set up 3 point attempts. TU and Jones continue to improve, and the coaches I'm sure will work on George's focus.

The team is still exceeding expectations by a mile. Destroy the Frog.

 

[JM4CY]

I’m not saying it’s impossible to happen but I feel significantly less worried about laying a massive turd on the road against an inferior opponent with a TJ coached team versus the previous several regimes.

 

[isufbcurt]

Jaz is the king of flopping

FIFY

 

[davegilbertson]

Point of growth I see for TJ is having a better feel for when things are getting out of control and we need a bucket/stop the bleeding.

Last night in 2H had 3 timeouts remaining by the time TT was rocking up by 18. Only used one after they threw an alley oop that felt like more than the final nail.

 

[madguy30]

I’m not saying it’s impossible to happen but I feel significantly less worried about laying a massive turd on the road against an inferior opponent with a TJ coached team versus the previous several regimes.

Better/more talented ISU teams have played way worse vs. way worse Tech teams, that's for sure.

 

[AuH2O]

Where is that from? I’m using ESPNs and it looks nothing like this.

Using ESPNs, here’s what their shot chart tells me. The second half is what to focus on, since that’s where the FT discrepancy occurred. Of course fouls don’t count as FG attempts (except and ones), so we are looking for share of shots at therim as a proxy.

TTU - 12 of their 19 second half shots were at the rim, or 63%.
ISU - 10 of their 33 second half shots were at the rim, or 30%.

It’s not a perfect determinant, but when actual FG selection is so overwhelming in this way, it strongly suggests TTU was attacking the rim dramatically more.

Here's the shot chart from ESPN on the second half that describes this. It doesn't mean there weren't tick tack fouls called on ISU, or that the officiating was consistent and called both ways. But it definitely shows a massive difference, that TTU was overwhelmingly going to the rim, and ISU was not. That's going to drive a big FT discrepancy. This and the first half shot chart also dispels the idea mentioned that ISU was getting fouled a lot but not getting calls attacking the basket. I recall Jones not getting a call and clearly getting fouled, but it was not too prevalent. Otherwise you would see a lot of missed shots at the rim by ISU. That really wasn't the case. ISU missed some short ones on putbacks and dishes to Rob and TE.

TTU was absolutely determined to get to the rim. They missed some shots at the rim and had some TOs, but they knew they would lose shooting jump shots, and accepted those misses and TOs, and it worked. ISU settled for a really high percentage of jump shots despite not missing many shots on drives.

 

[Clyde4cy]

Here's the shot chart from ESPN on the second half that describes this. It doesn't mean there weren't tick tack fouls called on ISU, or that the officiating was consistent and called both ways. But it definitely shows a massive difference, that TTU was overwhelmingly going to the rim, and ISU was not. That's going to drive a big FT discrepancy. This and the first half shot chart also dispels the idea mentioned that ISU was getting fouled a lot but not getting calls attacking the basket. I recall Jones not getting a call and clearly getting fouled, but it was not too prevalent. Otherwise you would see a lot of missed shots at the rim by ISU. That really wasn't the case. ISU missed some short ones on putbacks and dishes to Rob and TE.

TTU was absolutely determined to get to the rim. They missed some shots at the rim and had some TOs, but they knew they would lose shooting jump shots, and accepted those misses and TOs, and it worked. ISU settled for a really high percentage of jump shots despite not missing many shots on drives.

View attachment 94569

It is very possible Techs decision to attack the rim in the second half was predicted on the fact ISU’s bigs were in foul trouble.

 

[AuH2O]

Offensively this team reminds me --at times-- of the Prohm-led squad from a year ago. Having Hunter is about the only significant leg up this years team has compared to last. They don't play as much hero ball, but they can get every bit as stagnant and settle for poor % shots. The movement is generally better, but not in the 2H vs Tech (either time) or 2H against OU. It's almost like if they don't see the ball going through the hoop they slowly start to give up and get lazy on that side of the ball.

The ball and body movement was certainly better earlier in the season, but realistically that might be more about going up against elite defenses most nights.

I'm with you - I want to see a Hunter have a direct hand in the shot way more often. I think Brockington could have a huge offensive impact being a really active cutter and offensive rebound rather than getting the ball on a short shot clock and asked to create.

Last night sucked but I'm not worried. I think this gives TJ and the staff a really clear picture of some things to try to free up the offense. Adams is a hell of a defensive coach. On one hand TJ might be runaway National coach of the year, but I think he also might damn near be falling behind Adams for Big 12 COY.

This league is just filthy.

 

[AuH2O]

It is very possible Techs decision to attack the rim in the second half was predicted on the fact ISU’s bigs were in foul trouble.

Absolutely, but they were very much heavy in attacking the rim from the get-go. Their first half was almost exclusively attack the rim or three. And the point is in the first half ISU was just as effective going to the rim, both in finishing and drawing fouls. TTU ramped it up the 2nd half, ISU starting shooting a huge percentage of jumpshots.