Archie

[CTrojan88]

IMO, the jury on Archie is still out.  Crean was so god awful that more than anything, I am just happy to have a coach that doesn’t continually pace, pull up his trousers, clap and look at the clipboard. Archie will be fine but I do question his distribution of minutes to those that haven’t deserved them.  It is almost like he hasn’t held some accountable for their poor play but others he has.  I think Clifton Moore should be playing more, Newkirk less.  If Newkirk or Green refuse or don’t have the ability to step up their game(s) then play Johnny Jager.  Coach Knight was the master at that.  He played those that practiced well and sat those that didn’t....when Archie recognized that some weren’t buying in, he should have sat them for an extended period, plain and simple.  By not doing so, I think he is sending the wrong message to the younger players.  Maybe this is not the case but it sure looks like it on the surface.....

[cohete15]

4 minutes ago, CTrojan88 said:

IMO, the jury on Archie is still out.  Crean was so god awful that more than anything, I am just happy to have a coach that doesn’t continually pace, pull up his trousers, clap and look at the clipboard. Archie will be fine but I do question his distribution of minutes to those that haven’t deserved them.  It is almost like he hasn’t held some accountable for their poor play but others he has.  I think Clifton Moore should be playing more, Newkirk less.  If Newkirk or Green refuse or don’t have the ability to step up their game(s) then play Johnny Jager.  Coach Knight was the master at that.  He played those that practiced well and sat those that didn’t....when Archie recognized that some weren’t buying in, he should have sat them for an extended period, plain and simple.  By not doing so, I think he is sending the wrong message to the younger players.  Maybe this is not the case but it sure looks like it on the surface.....

This has been discussed quite a bit, and it's likely he plays the guys he sees the most out of in practice.

My theory is that we aren't good enough from top to bottom for guys to get exposed in practice and lose PT. If every day, Freddie is making Moore look silly, how can you justify playing Moore over Freddie? Same with Durham vs. Newkirk. 

Archie does a great job of playing the guys that are having the best night on a game by game basis, but he's not going to just randomly pick guys off the bench and see if they can do better.

[dbmhoosier]

Regarding Clifton Moore I think it's pretty obvious that Archie doesn't have him in his future plans.  He's either expecting a transfer or hoping the bench will motivate him to transfer.  That also shouldn't be a surprise with De'Ron and Morgan back and Race and Forrester coming in.

[FKIM01]

40 minutes ago, dbmhoosier said:

Regarding Clifton Moore I think it's pretty obvious that Archie doesn't have him in his future plans.  He's either expecting a transfer or hoping the bench will motivate him to transfer.  That also shouldn't be a surprise with De'Ron and Morgan back and Race and Forrester coming in.

I hope you're wrong, but some turnover almost seems inevitable.  I loved what I saw from Clifton in high school and I hope he steps it up and earns some PT.

[madmax]

2 hours ago, dbmhoosier said:

Regarding Clifton Moore I think it's pretty obvious that Archie doesn't have him in his future plans.  He's either expecting a transfer or hoping the bench will motivate him to transfer.  That also shouldn't be a surprise with De'Ron and Morgan back and Race and Forrester coming in.

I'm not sure that I buy this. I really think coaches want far less transfers then the fans do. Yeah, sure, they're will always be the Gelons of the world who get scholarships that they never deserved and get asked to move along, but this is the exception not the rule. Yes, it's true Clifton hasn't played a ton of minutes this year. And at times he has definitely looked lost on the floor. But you can't teach his size.. and for a roster that is severely undersized and doesn't look to be getting that  much bigger next year, I have a hard time thinking coach is trying to get rid of an athletic 6'10'' guy. He's a freshman. Maybe looking back Archie wishes he would have red shirted. Maybe he expected more development out of him throughout the year that never happened. No way to know. But again, I don't think CAM has a list of multiple players next year that he is hoping leave. Roster instability=almost always a bad thing.

Lastly there is a reason after all that Clifton found his way on some way too early NBA draft boards. He's got serious upside, just needs development.

[FW_Hoosier]

4 hours ago, cohete15 said:

This has been discussed quite a bit, and it's likely he plays the guys he sees the most out of in practice.

My theory is that we aren't good enough from top to bottom for guys to get exposed in practice and lose PT. If every day, Freddie is making Moore look silly, how can you justify playing Moore over Freddie? Same with Durham vs. Newkirk. 

Archie does a great job of playing the guys that are having the best night on a game by game basis, but he's not going to just randomly pick guys off the bench and see if they can do better.

I don’t see how it’s relevant whether Freddie is beating him in practice considering he’s not going up against Freddie in actual games.  And besides, it’s not an either/or situation between those two anyway.  Moore had 2 blocks and a steal in 7 minutes against Northwestern and Freddie played 17 minutes. Then Moore held his own in 7 minutes against MSU’s trees after Juwan went down, while  Freddie played 20 minutes.  Instead of allowing Moore to build on those performances, he hasn’t seen the floor since, and we’ve gone 1-3 in those games.  Going to the athletic and talented 6’10 freshman to provide some length to a seriously undersized lineup isn’t “randomly picking a guy off the bench.”

[KoB2011]

10 hours ago, BobSaccamanno said:

The fever pitched panicking may be a fun read in a few years.  Someone ought to save this thread for future reference.

It's not all that complicated.  You switched schemes on both ends.  Not a little, but a total overhaul.  The defense and ball control have gotten progressively better.  The roster is not Archie's and it is woefully deficient.  Most importantly, there is a total lack of shooting.  We throw out all these 3-16's from three and it's going to be tough to win.  

Schilling has a great resume in player development.  

I cannot guarantee that Archie will not bust, but I like the way he thinks and is setting things up in the different aspects.  It's not just offensive and defensive schemes, but also recruiting and roster construction.  He handles himself well too.  I am backing him until he has time to prove himself.  

This team was never going to have a good season this year, so if that was your expectation, I can see why you're disappointed.  It will take time.  Most of the criticisms I have seen are amusing and silly, and fairly unrealistic.  Now if in a couple of years, his schemes get beaten by a drum and he is recruiting the wrong guys, then we can blast away.  I am in the camp that this will not happen and fire away at me if it does.

Spot on. I know I was unfortunately way off on my expectations of this team but that doesn't automatically mean Archie is doing a bad job; in this instance I think it means I did a bad job projecting and evaluating. 

 

[CauseThatsMyDJ]

Regarding the talent argument around OSU. Here are the recruiting class rankings from the last four years:

IU

2017: 31

2016: 23

2015: 32

2014: 21

OSU

2017: 23

2016: 42

2015: 5

2014: 6

Obviously early departures and transfers have occurred, but it’s gotta help a new coach when the juniors and seniors he inherits are from classes ranked 5 and 6, no? The idea that Holtmann inherited a similar situation to Archie is inaccurate. Let’s see how he does in a couple years. 

[KoB2011]

26 minutes ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

Regarding the talent argument around OSU. Here are the recruiting class rankings from the last four years:

IU

2017: 31

2016: 23

2015: 32

2014: 21

OSU

2017: 23

2016: 42

2015: 5

2014: 6

Obviously early departures and transfers have occurred, but it’s gotta help a new coach when the juniors and seniors he inherits are from classes ranked 5 and 6, no? The idea that Holtmann inherited a similar situation to Archie is inaccurate. Let’s see how he does in a couple years. 

I'd also say the early departures hurt us a lot more than them. Lyle is the only big loss I can think of for OSU from those classes and it wouldn't be hard to make the case he has been addition by subtraction. 

[CauseThatsMyDJ]

2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I'd also say the early departures hurt us a lot more than them. Lyle is the only big loss I can think of for OSU from those classes and it wouldn't be hard to make the case he has been addition by subtraction. 

D’Angelo Russell was part of the 14 class so they are missing that piece. 

[KoB2011]

21 minutes ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

D’Angelo Russell was part of the 14 class so they are missing that piece. 

Ah, didn't realize that.  Big loss for sure, but they still have two top 30 seniors and we have Josh Newkirk and Robert Johnson.  

[IU Scott]

7 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

Ah, didn't realize that.  Big loss for sure, but they still have two top 30 seniors and we have Josh Newkirk and Robert Johnson.  

I also think one of those classes had all of their players transfer from OSU.

[FW_Hoosier]

8 hours ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

Regarding the talent argument around OSU. Here are the recruiting class rankings from the last four years:

IU

2017: 31

2016: 23

2015: 32

2014: 21

OSU

2017: 23

2016: 42

2015: 5

2014: 6

Obviously early departures and transfers have occurred, but it’s gotta help a new coach when the juniors and seniors he inherits are from classes ranked 5 and 6, no? The idea that Holtmann inherited a similar situation to Archie is inaccurate. Let’s see how he does in a couple years. 

The only players left from those 2014 and 2015 recruiting classes are Bates-Diop (2014 #29) and Tate (2014 #58).  Their other starters are Williams (2013 #72), Wesson (2017 #74), and Jackson (2016 juco transfer).  Claiming that their juniors and seniors benefited from being part of highly-ranked recruiting classes (especially when none of their current juniors were even part of the 2015 “movement” that got Matta fired) makes zero sense.  But if it makes you feel better about the fact that Holtmann is succeeding with basically the same level of talent Archie has, go for it.

[tdhoosier]

8 hours ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

Regarding the talent argument around OSU. Here are the recruiting class rankings from the last four years:

IU

2017: 31

2016: 23

2015: 32

2014: 21

OSU

2017: 23

2016: 42

2015: 5

2014: 6

Obviously early departures and transfers have occurred, but it’s gotta help a new coach when the juniors and seniors he inherits are from classes ranked 5 and 6, no? The idea that Holtmann inherited a similar situation to Archie is inaccurate. Let’s see how he does in a couple years. 

How about that? Our worst ranked class ended up being our best. Ultimately all 3 may play in the NBA. I know we/I've had some backhanded comments towards Crean, but Kudos to him here. 

[tdhoosier]

20 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

The only players left from those 2014 and 2015 recruiting classes are Bates-Diop (2014 #29) and Tate (2014 #58).  Their other starters are Williams (2013 #72), Wesson (2017 #74), and Jackson (2016 juco transfer).  Claiming that their juniors and seniors benefited from being part of highly-ranked recruiting classes (especially when none of their current juniors were even part of the 2015 “movement” that got Matta fired) makes zero sense.  But if it makes you feel better about the fact that Holtmann is succeeding with basically the same level of talent Archie has, go for it.

agree.....I think we're looking at the wrong thing if we're debating talent. 

IU doesn't have the players to fill the roles that make up a successful basketball team: a shooter and most importantly a dependable point guard. Green, Johnson, Newkirk, and CuJo didn't not develop into the players we needed them to be this season. End of story. 

I don't care how anybody was ranked coming out of high school. OSU has a scorer in Bates Diop, a consistently great player in Tate, and a dependable PG in Jackson. 

....and we have, uh, Morgan. Holtman has much more to work with. He did not develop these guys to the level they're playing at in 6 months. 

[FW_Hoosier]

6 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

agree.....I think we're looking at the wrong thing if we're debating talent. 

IU doesn't have the players to fill the roles that make up a successful basketball team: a shooter and most importantly a dependable point guard. Green, Johnson, Newkirk, and CuJo didn't not develop into the players we needed them to be this season. End of story. 

I don't care how anybody was ranked coming out of high school. OSU has a scorer in Bates Diop, a consistently great player in Tate, and a dependable PG in Jackson. 

....and we have, uh, Morgan. 

Jackson wasn’t an impact player until Holtmann got there.  I haven’t watched enough OSU to say for sure, but if you look at Rob and Tate’s stats this year, they’re almost identical, with Rob being better in PPG and 3FG%, and almost exactly the same in TOs per game.  Morgan and Bates-Diop are obviously both all-conference level players, but Bates-Diop admittedly gives them an outside shooting threat that Morgan doesn’t give IU.  The pieces on their team may fit together better than ours, and they’re definitely a better outside shooting team than we are. But individually, they’re not more talented than IU at all.

[tdhoosier]

1 minute ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Jackson wasn’t an impact player until Holtmann got there.  I haven’t watched enough OSU to say for sure, but if you look at Rob and Tate’s stats this year, they’re almost identical, with Rob being better in PPG and 3FG%, and almost exactly the same in TOs per game.  Morgan and Bates-Diop are obviously both all-conference level players, but Bates-Diop admittedly gives them an outside shooting threat that Morgan doesn’t give IU.  The pieces on their team may fit together better than ours, and they’re definitely a better outside shooting team than we are. But individually, they’re not more talented than IU at all. 

Jackosn stepped up for sure. 

Rob and Tate are apples and oranges. Tate's a forward and barely shoots the 3. He is shooting 56% from the field though.

Holtman is doing a great job, not trying to take anything away from him, but his pieces definitely fit together better than ours...that's for sure. I just don't know what degree of credit he deserves for it (definitely a good amount). If we got Holtman and OSU got Archie....I think at this point we'd be asking ourselves, 'why didn't we go after Archie?'.  I do believe that Archie would've been more successful with OSU's roster than IU's. AND I don't think Holtman would be having much success if he inherited IU's roster. 

It's all hypotheticals and speculation at this point. We'll see where both teams are in 3 years. I think we'll both be good....hopefully we'll be better. 

[FW_Hoosier]

7 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

Jackosn stepped up for sure. 

Rob and Tate are apples and oranges. Tate's a forward and barely shoots the 3. He is shooting 56% from the field though.

Holtman is doing a great job, not trying to take anything away from him, but his pieces definitely fit together better than ours...that's for sure. I just don't know what degree of credit he deserves for it (definitely a good amount). If we got Holtman and OSU got Archie....I think at this point we'd be asking ourselves, 'why didn't we go after Archie?'.  I do believe that Archie would've been more successful with OSU's roster than IU's. AND I don't think Holtman would be having much success if he inherited IU's roster. 

It's all hypotheticals and speculation at this point. We'll see where both teams are in 3 years. I think we'll both be good....hopefully we'll be better. 

I’m definitely not saying I wish we got Holtmann instead of Archie.  Everything you said could very well be right, and it’s definitely all just hypotheticals and speculation right now.  I just think all the rationalization about how Holtmann has SO much more talent to work with than Archie is off base.  Remains to be seen how it all pans out, but at this point OSU fans probably have a little more reason for optimism than IU fans (winning will do that).  I think whoever comes out on top on the recruiting trail will end up being the more successful coach.

[cohete15]

11 hours ago, FW_Hoosier said:

I don’t see how it’s relevant whether Freddie is beating him in practice considering he’s not going up against Freddie in actual games.  And besides, it’s not an either/or situation between those two anyway.  Moore had 2 blocks and a steal in 7 minutes against Northwestern and Freddie played 17 minutes. Then Moore held his own in 7 minutes against MSU’s trees after Juwan went down, while  Freddie played 20 minutes.  Instead of allowing Moore to build on those performances, he hasn’t seen the floor since, and we’ve gone 1-3 in those games.  Going to the athletic and talented 6’10 freshman to provide some length to a seriously undersized lineup isn’t “randomly picking a guy off the bench.”

I’m not disagreeing with you that Moore should get PT. But to act as if performance in practice should have no bearing on playing time is ridiculous. I’m not an advocate for Freddie or Newkirk. But you can’t just simply say “Well Josh isn’t playing well, let’s put Moore in.” Josh plays the 1, Moore plays the 5. And it does come down to Freddie, because it’s Juwan, Justin, Freddie, Hartman and Moore. At this point I would like to see Moore take that 1st sub. But it’s pretty difficult to justify it if Freddie is eating his lunch on a daily basis. I highly doubt Archie has something against playing a 6’11 player. Why he doesn’t play him more, I don’t know. But to guess it’s based off practice performance is completely legitimate. Maybe Moore is lazy, maybe he has a bad attitude. Maybe none of those are true. “Randomly picking someone off the bench” is was response to the suggestion that we should go with Johnny Jager. 

Just remember how great CuJo was against KU. Or Durham’s streak of no turnovers. 1 or 2 good games doesn’t mean you should get more PT if you’re horrible in practice. 

[CauseThatsMyDJ]

1 hour ago, FW_Hoosier said:

The only players left from those 2014 and 2015 recruiting classes are Bates-Diop (2014 #29) and Tate (2014 #58).  Their other starters are Williams (2013 #72), Wesson (2017 #74), and Jackson (2016 juco transfer).  Claiming that their juniors and seniors benefited from being part of highly-ranked recruiting classes (especially when none of their current juniors were even part of the 2015 “movement” that got Matta fired) makes zero sense.  But if it makes you feel better about the fact that Holtmann is succeeding with basically the same level of talent Archie has, go for it.

If you want to keep living under the misguided opinion that the talent levels are the same to fit the narrative you are trying to construct, go ahead.

You listed the starters. You take a look at who IU is starting? #49, #77, #117, #135, and McRoberts (NR). So OSU has 4 of the top 5 ranked players and IU's last three drop down considerably, yet the talent levels are the same?

 

[FW_Hoosier]

15 minutes ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

If you want to keep living under the misguided opinion that the talent levels are the same to fit the narrative you are trying to construct, go ahead.

You listed the starters. You take a look at who IU is starting? #49, #77, #117, #135, and McRoberts (NR). So OSU has 4 of the top 5 ranked players and IU's last three drop down considerably, yet the talent levels are the same?

 

Lol, I’m the one trying to construct a narrative, huh?  You claimed that Holtmann has two top-10 recruiting classes to work with when there’s currently a grand total of one top 50 recruit left on their roster from both of those classes combined.  I don’t think I’m the one distorting things to try and create a narrative here.  And if you want to argue that Morgan’s not the second best player on either team to further advance your narrative, be my guest.

[CauseThatsMyDJ]

4 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Lol, I’m the one trying to construct a narrative, huh?  You claimed that Holtmann has two top-10 recruiting classes to work with when there’s currently a grand total of one top 50 recruit left on their roster from both of those classes combined.  I don’t think I’m the one distorting things to try and create a narrative here.  And if you want to argue that Morgan’s not the second best player on either team to further advance your narrative, be my guest.

Do you have anything tangible at all to say that the rosters have equal talent? Or just your eye test?

[FW_Hoosier]

7 minutes ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

Do you have anything tangible at all to say that the rosters have equal talent? Or just your eye test?

Nice deflection.  You can go back and look at the half-dozen posts I’ve made on the subject referring to stats, rankings, and the eye test.  But I suppose that’s not nearly as “tangible” as the fact that OSU once had two top 10 recruiting classes made up of players no longer on the roster.

[5fouls]

Bottom line is that most, if not all, that are using our roster as the reason for our struggles are doing so with the benefit of hindsight. Most of us expected that Archie would have this team better than 500.  That does not mean he has done a bad job. Call it average or good if you want.  But it is less than most of us expected. And it seems as tthough most are willing to accept that the roster should receive the bulk of the blame.  I also think the roster is a huge part, but I also expected Archie to do more with it.

[rico]

When talkin tOSU just remember what Dakich said during the broadcast.  He alluded to the Bucks success this year as "addiction by subtraction".  The Bucks were really not that bad last year.  The problem was that had some "cancers" on the team.  The "cancers" leave and guess what?  Holtmann gets all the accolades.