|
|
IOWA ST OKLAHOMA ST |
|
|
| 76 Final 78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| | |
779 | IOWA ST | | | 780 | OKLAHOMA ST | -7 | -6.5 |
|
|
| | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 14-5 | -4 | 6-8 | 3-2 | 78.6 | 36.4 | 45.1% | 40.8 | 66.8 | 30.7 | 40.9% | 33.9 | Road Games | 3-5 | -8 | 3-5 | 2-1 | 72.0 | 33.9 | 41.9% | 38.6 | 72.6 | 33.0 | 43.4% | 35.7 | Last 5 Games | 4-1 | -2 | 3-2 | 1-2 | 67.6 | 31.6 | 44.0% | 34.8 | 60.4 | 27.6 | 41.3% | 35.4 | Conference Games | 4-2 | -3 | 4-2 | 2-2 | 71.2 | 32.7 | 43.4% | 35.3 | 66.5 | 30.0 | 42.9% | 37.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 78.6 | 36.4 | 28-63 | 45.1% | 9-25 | 36.0% | 13-19 | 68.5% | 41 | 12 | 16 | 17 | 7 | 14 | 3 | vs opponents surrendering | 66.3 | 30.6 | 23-56 | 41.6% | 6-18 | 32.7% | 13-20 | 68.2% | 35 | 10 | 12 | 18 | 7 | 14 | 3 | Team Stats (Road Games) | 72.0 | 33.9 | 26-63 | 41.9% | 8-25 | 31.9% | 11-16 | 69.5% | 39 | 12 | 14 | 20 | 6 | 15 | 2 | Stats Against (All Games) | 66.8 | 30.7 | 24-59 | 40.9% | 6-19 | 30.4% | 13-18 | 71.3% | 34 | 9 | 13 | 17 | 7 | 15 | 3 | vs opponents averaging | 68.8 | 32.6 | 24-56 | 43.4% | 6-18 | 33.0% | 14-21 | 67.9% | 36 | 10 | 13 | 18 | 7 | 14 | 4 | Stats Against (Road Games) | 72.6 | 33.0 | 25-58 | 43.4% | 5-16 | 32.1% | 17-23 | 73.9% | 36 | 9 | 13 | 16 | 8 | 13 | 3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
All Games | 13-5 | +2 | 9-7 | 1-7 | 70.7 | 33.8 | 44.1% | 36.8 | 58.3 | 25.7 | 37.8% | 32.8 | Home Games | 10-1 | +0.6 | 7-3 | 1-3 | 73.2 | 34.8 | 46.9% | 36.6 | 53.5 | 23.3 | 37.9% | 29.6 | Last 5 Games | 3-2 | -1 | 2-3 | 1-2 | 68.8 | 31.6 | 43.7% | 37.8 | 59.4 | 27.4 | 38.8% | 29.2 | Conference Games | 3-3 | -2 | 2-4 | 1-2 | 68.5 | 31.7 | 43.3% | 36.3 | 61.7 | 27.8 | 39.9% | 30.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
Team Stats (All Games) | 70.7 | 33.8 | 24-55 | 44.1% | 6-18 | 32.9% | 16-21 | 75.5% | 37 | 10 | 13 | 17 | 7 | 13 | 5 | vs opponents surrendering | 65.8 | 30.9 | 23-56 | 42.0% | 6-18 | 32.8% | 13-19 | 68.2% | 34 | 10 | 12 | 18 | 6 | 14 | 4 | Team Stats (Home Games) | 73.2 | 34.8 | 26-55 | 46.9% | 7-19 | 37.3% | 14-19 | 75.1% | 37 | 10 | 14 | 15 | 8 | 13 | 5 | Stats Against (All Games) | 58.3 | 25.7 | 20-54 | 37.8% | 6-18 | 32.2% | 12-18 | 65.6% | 33 | 9 | 9 | 19 | 6 | 15 | 3 | vs opponents averaging | 68.9 | 32.3 | 25-56 | 43.9% | 6-17 | 33.6% | 14-20 | 68.2% | 36 | 10 | 13 | 18 | 7 | 13 | 4 | Stats Against (Home Games) | 53.5 | 23.3 | 19-51 | 37.9% | 6-18 | 31.0% | 9-14 | 62.3% | 30 | 8 | 8 | 18 | 6 | 17 | 1 |
|
|
Average power rating of opponents played: IOWA ST 71.5, OKLAHOMA ST 74.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
12/15/2012 | *DRAKE | 86-77 | W | -7.5 | W | | - | 26-59 | 44.1% | 45 | 17 | 27-62 | 43.5% | 30 | 14 | 12/19/2012 | @ MISSOURI-KC | 76-61 | W | -16.5 | L | | - | 31-55 | 56.4% | 32 | 13 | 22-48 | 45.8% | 21 | 12 | 1/1/2013 | YALE | 80-70 | W | -18.5 | L | | - | 24-61 | 39.3% | 42 | 9 | 24-56 | 42.9% | 39 | 13 | 1/9/2013 | @ KANSAS | 89-97 | L | 11.5 | W | 149 | O | 30-73 | 41.1% | 38 | 11 | 31-62 | 50.0% | 45 | 14 | 1/12/2013 | TEXAS | 82-62 | W | -9 | W | 139 | O | 25-57 | 43.9% | 37 | 5 | 24-61 | 39.3% | 37 | 11 | 1/16/2013 | W VIRGINIA | 69-67 | W | -8 | L | 143 | U | 23-55 | 41.8% | 35 | 13 | 25-61 | 41.0% | 41 | 15 | 1/19/2013 | @ TCU | 63-50 | W | -11.5 | W | | - | 28-56 | 50.0% | 38 | 16 | 20-55 | 36.4% | 33 | 11 | 1/23/2013 | @ TEXAS TECH | 51-56 | L | -10.5 | L | 146 | U | 18-51 | 35.3% | 29 | 11 | 20-51 | 39.2% | 38 | 15 | 1/26/2013 | KANSAS ST | 73-67 | W | -4 | W | | - | 26-54 | 48.1% | 35 | 10 | 28-55 | 50.9% | 28 | 12 | 1/30/2013 | @ OKLAHOMA ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/2/2013 | BAYLOR | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/4/2013 | OKLAHOMA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/9/2013 | @ KANSAS ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/13/2013 | @ TEXAS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/16/2013 | TCU | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/20/2013 | @ BAYLOR | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12/16/2012 | C ARKANSAS | 91-63 | W | | - | | - | 32-66 | 48.5% | 53 | 16 | 24-69 | 34.8% | 35 | 14 | 12/19/2012 | TX-ARLINGTON | 69-44 | W | -14.5 | W | | - | 25-58 | 43.1% | 29 | 15 | 18-46 | 39.1% | 34 | 31 | 12/22/2012 | TENNESSEE TECH | 78-42 | W | -21 | W | | - | 29-59 | 49.2% | 36 | 12 | 15-39 | 38.5% | 27 | 20 | 12/31/2012 | GONZAGA | 68-69 | L | -2.5 | L | 138.5 | U | 26-55 | 47.3% | 21 | 8 | 24-50 | 48.0% | 37 | 15 | 1/5/2013 | @ KANSAS ST | 67-73 | L | 3.5 | L | | - | 20-49 | 40.8% | 29 | 12 | 27-60 | 45.0% | 39 | 12 | 1/9/2013 | TCU | 63-45 | W | -18.5 | L | | - | 25-48 | 52.1% | 40 | 24 | 17-47 | 36.2% | 17 | 21 | 1/12/2013 | @ OKLAHOMA | 68-77 | L | 2 | L | | - | 22-56 | 39.3% | 36 | 15 | 25-58 | 43.1% | 37 | 13 | 1/19/2013 | TEXAS TECH | 79-45 | W | -18 | W | 136 | U | 25-53 | 47.2% | 43 | 10 | 13-46 | 28.3% | 26 | 13 | 1/21/2013 | @ BAYLOR | 54-64 | L | 4.5 | L | 134.5 | U | 22-63 | 34.9% | 36 | 11 | 21-51 | 41.2% | 38 | 14 | 1/26/2013 | W VIRGINIA | 80-66 | W | -9.5 | W | 128.5 | O | 25-52 | 48.1% | 34 | 12 | 24-56 | 42.9% | 28 | 13 | 1/30/2013 | IOWA ST | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/2/2013 | @ KANSAS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/6/2013 | BAYLOR | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/9/2013 | @ TEXAS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/13/2013 | @ TEXAS TECH | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/16/2013 | OKLAHOMA | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | 2/20/2013 | KANSAS | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
| IOWA ST: Fred Hoiberg is making strong progress with this Iowa State program, but he will need everything to mesh perfectly for this team to compete this season. He brings in a solid recruit in PF Georges Niang to help fill the void of last year's leading scorer and rebounder Royce White (13.4 PPG, 9.3 RPG) who is now in the NBA. The biggest unknown on this team is how transfer point guard Korie Lucious will fit in after sitting out a year coming from Michigan State. Lucious has seen big moments and could be a force in the conference and will be joined in the backcourt by fellow transfer Will Clyburn, who came over to Hoiberg after averaging 17.1 PPG two seasons ago at Utah. How those two respond to their new conference will determine if this team can be a contender. | | OKLAHOMA ST: Even though this team brings back four starters, head coach Travis Ford's hopes for this campaign rest in the hands of five-star recruit Marcus Smart, who has the potential to emerge as one of the most dangerous point guards in the nation. He'll have to make up the production of last year's leading scorer Keiton Page, who averaged 17.1 PPG. In addition to Smart, swingman Le'Bryan Nash (13.3 PPG, 5.0 RPG) is a matchup nightmare while guard Markel Brown (10.5 PPG, 5.1 RPG, 2.4 APG) will also make a bigger impact. Look for sophomore Michael Cobbins (5.0 PPG, 5.7 RPG, 1.5 BPG) to also make more noise in the paint after steadily improving down the stretch last season. |
|
|
|
|
Last Updated: 4/26/2024 4:19:56 PM EST. |
|
|