| | | |
IOWA PENN ST |
|
| 128.5 | 81 Final 77 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | |
619 | IOWA | -3.5 | -3.5 | 620 | PENN ST | 129 | 128.5 |
|
|
| | |
|
| | | |
|
|
All Games | 18-10 | -4 | 11-12 | 9-10 | 69.1 | 35.0 | 43.5% | 37.1 | 61.5 | 27.0 | 39.3% | 33.5 | Road Games | 5-6 | -0.5 | 5-6 | 3-7 | 62.9 | 30.7 | 40.4% | 36.8 | 63.9 | 27.4 | 41.6% | 33.1 | Last 5 Games | 3-2 | -3.2 | 2-2 | 2-2 | 68.6 | 32.0 | 43.8% | 37.8 | 56.6 | 24.4 | 36.2% | 33.8 | Conference Games | 9-6 | -0.2 | 8-6 | 8-6 | 67.8 | 33.3 | 46.3% | 34.2 | 63.7 | 27.4 | 41.5% | 30.8 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 69.1 | 35.0 | 24-55 | 43.5% | 6-17 | 33.5% | 16-21 | 73.2% | 37 | 11 | 15 | 16 | 6 | 12 | 5 | vs opponents surrendering | 64.1 | 29.7 | 23-55 | 41.6% | 6-19 | 33.6% | 12-18 | 68.8% | 33 | 9 | 12 | 18 | 6 | 13 | 3 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 62.9 | 30.7 | 22-54 | 40.4% | 5-17 | 32.4% | 14-20 | 71.2% | 37 | 12 | 13 | 17 | 5 | 11 | 4 | Stats Against (All Games) | 61.5 | 27.0 | 22-56 | 39.3% | 6-20 | 31.4% | 11-16 | 70.2% | 33 | 9 | 12 | 18 | 6 | 12 | 4 | vs opponents averaging | 68.7 | 32.4 | 24-54 | 44.5% | 6-19 | 34.8% | 14-20 | 69.9% | 35 | 9 | 13 | 17 | 6 | 12 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 63.9 | 27.4 | 23-55 | 41.6% | 6-21 | 28.8% | 12-17 | 71.4% | 33 | 9 | 13 | 16 | 6 | 9 | 5 |
|
|
| |
|
|
All Games | 15-13 | -0.4 | 12-13 | 7-13 | 66.3 | 30.9 | 42.3% | 35.4 | 65.3 | 29.9 | 40.7% | 34.4 | Home Games | 10-4 | +4.8 | 7-5 | 4-6 | 66.4 | 32.3 | 42.9% | 35.8 | 59.6 | 27.1 | 38.9% | 33.1 | Last 5 Games | 1-4 | -3.2 | 2-3 | 1-4 | 54.0 | 24.6 | 36.4% | 34.8 | 61.8 | 28.4 | 41.5% | 34.0 | Conference Games | 3-12 | -9 | 9-6 | 6-9 | 61.3 | 28.7 | 41.2% | 32.1 | 65.3 | 30.3 | 43.7% | 32.9 |
|
| |
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 66.3 | 30.9 | 23-55 | 42.3% | 6-20 | 32.6% | 13-19 | 69.1% | 35 | 9 | 10 | 20 | 6 | 13 | 4 | vs opponents surrendering | 65.2 | 30.1 | 23-55 | 42.3% | 6-19 | 33.9% | 12-18 | 68.0% | 34 | 9 | 12 | 18 | 6 | 12 | 3 | Team Stats (Home Games) | 66.4 | 32.3 | 23-54 | 42.9% | 6-19 | 34.3% | 14-20 | 70.3% | 36 | 9 | 11 | 18 | 6 | 12 | 5 | Stats Against (All Games) | 65.3 | 29.9 | 22-55 | 40.7% | 6-18 | 32.4% | 15-21 | 68.3% | 34 | 8 | 11 | 18 | 6 | 12 | 3 | vs opponents averaging | 67.6 | 31.6 | 24-55 | 43.3% | 7-19 | 34.7% | 13-19 | 69.1% | 35 | 9 | 13 | 17 | 6 | 12 | 4 | Stats Against (Home Games) | 59.6 | 27.1 | 21-55 | 38.9% | 5-19 | 27.5% | 12-18 | 66.5% | 33 | 8 | 10 | 18 | 6 | 12 | 3 |
|
| Average power rating of opponents played: IOWA 77.4, PENN ST 76.1 |
| | |
|
|
1/13/2015 | @ MINNESOTA | 77-75 | W | 3 | W | 139 | O | 25-48 | 52.1% | 33 | 14 | 27-59 | 45.8% | 30 | 9 | 1/17/2015 | OHIO ST | 76-67 | W | -1.5 | W | 138 | O | 24-47 | 51.1% | 37 | 10 | 23-60 | 38.3% | 31 | 9 | 1/20/2015 | @ WISCONSIN | 50-82 | L | 10 | L | 133.5 | U | 20-46 | 43.5% | 23 | 9 | 29-59 | 49.2% | 37 | 1 | 1/24/2015 | @ PURDUE | 63-67 | L | 1 | L | 133 | U | 21-64 | 32.8% | 46 | 8 | 25-53 | 47.2% | 31 | 6 | 1/31/2015 | WISCONSIN | 63-74 | L | 4.5 | L | 130.5 | O | 23-48 | 47.9% | 24 | 8 | 23-52 | 44.2% | 35 | 6 | 2/5/2015 | @ MICHIGAN | 72-54 | W | -2 | W | 121 | O | 32-51 | 62.7% | 33 | 6 | 19-47 | 40.4% | 17 | 6 | 2/8/2015 | MARYLAND | 71-55 | W | -6.5 | W | 134.5 | U | 27-42 | 64.3% | 30 | 19 | 18-49 | 36.7% | 19 | 16 | 2/12/2015 | MINNESOTA | 59-64 | L | -6.5 | L | 134.5 | U | 21-49 | 42.9% | 38 | 16 | 23-57 | 40.4% | 30 | 6 | 2/15/2015 | @ NORTHWESTERN | 61-66 | L | -6 | L | 126 | O | 20-62 | 32.3% | 38 | 4 | 21-50 | 42.0% | 39 | 10 | 2/19/2015 | RUTGERS | 81-47 | W | -14.5 | W | 128 | P | 30-59 | 50.8% | 39 | 11 | 18-55 | 32.7% | 33 | 19 | 2/22/2015 | @ NEBRASKA | 74-46 | W | -1 | W | 124 | U | 29-58 | 50.0% | 38 | 8 | 17-52 | 32.7% | 30 | 13 | 2/25/2015 | ILLINOIS | 68-60 | W | -8 | T | 126 | O | 21-48 | 43.7% | 36 | 12 | 19-57 | 33.3% | 37 | 13 | 2/28/2015 | @ PENN ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3/3/2015 | @ INDIANA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3/7/2015 | NORTHWESTERN | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
| |
|
|
1/13/2015 | @ INDIANA | 73-76 | L | 7 | W | 142 | O | 31-66 | 47.0% | 37 | 9 | 26-55 | 47.3% | 30 | 9 | 1/17/2015 | PURDUE | 77-84 | L | -1 | L | 134 | O | 26-56 | 46.4% | 31 | 17 | 28-58 | 48.3% | 35 | 16 | 1/21/2015 | @ MICHIGAN ST | 60-66 | L | 12 | W | 134.5 | U | 20-47 | 42.6% | 26 | 13 | 23-54 | 42.6% | 39 | 13 | 1/24/2015 | RUTGERS | 79-51 | W | -7 | W | 127 | O | 29-57 | 50.9% | 32 | 9 | 21-48 | 43.7% | 28 | 16 | 1/28/2015 | MINNESOTA | 63-58 | W | 1.5 | W | 136 | U | 21-50 | 42.0% | 36 | 16 | 23-59 | 39.0% | 28 | 15 | 1/31/2015 | @ ILLINOIS | 58-60 | L | 6 | W | 131.5 | U | 19-45 | 42.2% | 32 | 19 | 20-53 | 37.7% | 26 | 13 | 2/4/2015 | @ MARYLAND | 58-64 | L | 7.5 | W | 131 | U | 22-57 | 38.6% | 29 | 11 | 23-52 | 44.2% | 38 | 15 | 2/7/2015 | NEBRASKA | 56-43 | W | -4 | W | 120 | U | 19-44 | 43.2% | 39 | 16 | 15-51 | 29.4% | 26 | 10 | 2/11/2015 | @ OHIO ST | 55-75 | L | 12 | L | 133 | U | 19-59 | 32.2% | 38 | 15 | 24-54 | 44.4% | 40 | 12 | 2/14/2015 | MARYLAND | 73-76 | L | -1.5 | L | 127.5 | O | 25-60 | 41.7% | 32 | 7 | 23-47 | 48.9% | 31 | 11 | 2/18/2015 | WISCONSIN | 47-55 | L | 11 | W | 130 | U | 21-54 | 38.9% | 28 | 6 | 20-51 | 39.2% | 37 | 8 | 2/21/2015 | @ NORTHWESTERN | 39-60 | L | 2 | L | 122.5 | U | 15-55 | 27.3% | 37 | 14 | 23-50 | 46.0% | 36 | 9 | 2/28/2015 | IOWA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3/4/2015 | OHIO ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 3/8/2015 | @ MINNESOTA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
| | | IOWA: Iowa brings back one of the best frontcourt players in the conference in PF Aaron White (12.8 PPG, 6.7 RPG, 1.8 APG). He is similar to Wisconsin's Frank Kaminsky, as he is able to make plays from all over the court. He is very physical on the block with his 6-foot-9, 220-pound frame, overpowering his opponents for easy baskets. SF Jarrod Uthoff (7.6 PPG, 4.6 RPG) is another inside player who can step out and hit the perimeter shot (42% threes). This is a team that has the frontcourt depth to match any team in the Big Ten, as guys like 7-foot-1 C Adam Woodbury (5.7 PPG, 3.9 RPG, 52% FG) and 6-foot-10 C Gabriel Olaseni (6.5 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 1.3 BPG) are two huge players that can take up minutes and help dominate the glass. The key will be the performance of the backcourt, as SG Anthony Clemmons (2.4 PPG, 1.7 APG, 1.3 RPG) must emerge as a leader on the team. | | PENN ST: The Nittany Lions only lost one starter from last season's team, but it was a big one in PG Tim Frazier. The leading returning scorer is SG D.J. Newbill (17.8 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 1.7 APG), who has the ability to score as well as anybody in the conference. With Frazier gone, defenses are going to focus more on Newbill, who must improve his three-point shot, as teams will also sag off him and dare him to shoot from deep. PF Brandon Taylor (9.2 PPG, 4.9 RPG, 1.1 BPG) is an undersized power forward, but he creates matchups because of his athleticism. Penn State has been competitive against ranked teams in the past, as they knocked off Ohio State both times last season. |
| | |
| Last Updated: 3/19/2024 9:56:18 AM EST. |
|
|
| |
|