Archie

[tdhoosier]

Can I be the mediator and say that all anybody really has is the eye test? I think things got jumbled up when recruiting rankings got brought into the fold. If we went by recruiting rankings UK would be the best team in the country every year. Nevermind that  our worst ranked class (2015) was probably better than any class either school brought in. High school rankings are meaningless when determining present day on court talent. 

So, who cares how somebody was ranked 3 or 4 years ago? Who has the better players right NOW? Bates Diop is the best. Morgan is 2nd best. The next 3 are Tate, Jackson and maybe RoJo?...when he decides to show up?

TBH, I don't even know who our second best player is and I'm not even sure if an IU player would fill that 5th slot? The point is OSU's 2nd and 3rd best players are SO much better than our 2nd best player. 

Did OSU have the perceived better players at the beginning of the season? Hard to tell. But while our heads were in the clouds as we optimistically projected our team to be on the NCAA bubble, publication after publication said we don't have a PG.....and we don't have that guard who can create his own shot. Come February, and we don't have PG....we don't have a guard who can create his own shot. Can't all be on Archie's back for not turning nothing into something. No team is going to be competitive without guys filling those 2 roles. OSU has those guys and it's reflected in their record. 

 

 

 

 

[cohete15]

35 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

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.

We will be better than .500. We have hit a real rough part of the schedule and we have dropped a few games we shouldn’t have. 

IF we beat MSU on Saturday... is there a game left on the schedule that you don’t think we have a good shot to win? Only one I’ll point to is @ Rutgers on Monday. Another RIDICULOUS turnaround. 

[FW_Hoosier]

3 minutes ago, rico said:

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.  

But wasn’t that the justification we made for expecting improvement this year?  JBJ was a cancer, he was terrible on defense, and we were better without him in 2015.  Bryant was terrible on defense and his constant whining negatively affected the team’s mentality.  OG missed most of the season anyway, so we wouldn’t miss him.  But now the prevailing wisdom is “we lost the three best players from last year, of course we suck.”

[rico]

Just now, FW_Hoosier said:

But wasn’t that the justification we made for expecting improvement this year?  JBJ was a cancer, he was terrible on defense, and we were better without him in 2015.  Bryant was terrible on defense and his constant whining negatively affected the team’s mentality.  OG missed most of the season anyway, so we wouldn’t miss him.  But now the prevailing wisdom is “we lost the three best players from last year, of course we suck.”

I never said any of that........but Ohio St. had the pieces in place.  The problem was the inmates were running the asylum in Bucknutville.  Matta did allow that to happen.  As far as IU I think the justification just came from getting a new coach.

[cohete15]

3 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

But wasn’t that the justification we made for expecting improvement this year?  JBJ was a cancer, he was terrible on defense, and we were better without him in 2015.  Bryant was terrible on defense and his constant whining negatively affected the team’s mentality.  OG missed most of the season anyway, so we wouldn’t miss him.  But now the prevailing wisdom is “we lost the three best players from last year, of course we suck.”

I don’t think anyone referred to JBj or Bryant as cancers. We didn’t have any leadership from them, but they certainly weren’t cancers to the team.  

[Fundamentals]

8 minutes ago, cohete15 said:

We will be better than .500. We have hit a real rough part of the schedule and we have dropped a few games we shouldn’t have. 

IF we beat MSU on Saturday... is there a game left on the schedule that you don’t think we have a good shot to win? Only one I’ll point to is @ Rutgers on Monday. Another RIDICULOUS turnaround. 

IU will lose at Nebraska by double digits, otherwise, I agree 

[cohete15]

18 minutes ago, Fundamentals said:

IU will lose at Nebraska by double digits, otherwise, I agree 

Certainly possible. But I think it just depends on the outcome of games prior. If we’re still playing .500 ball, we probably aren’t going to win there. If we are on a bit of a win streak, I think we take momentum (especially with the end of the season in sight) and get a hard fought win. 

But I think getting a win on Saturday is our last chance to end with a pretty good season. This team would struggle to take a 4th straight loss from a mental standpoint. 

[Hoosier82]

32 minutes ago, cohete15 said:

I don’t think anyone referred to JBj or Bryant as cancers. We didn’t have any leadership from them, but they certainly weren’t cancers to the team.  

I don’t remember the “cancer” term used specifically but there were a TON of posters continuously bashing JBJ and insisting IU would benefit from addition by subtraction after he left. Bryant took plenty of heat himself and some deservedly so. Some of those same posters are now somehow using JBJ’s early departure as part of the reason IU isn’t good this season. I guess you don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone...

[Proud2BAHoosier]

3 minutes ago, Hoosier82 said:

I don’t remember the “cancer” term used specifically but there were a TON of posters continuously bashing JBJ and insisting IU would benefit from addition by subtraction after he left. Bryant took plenty of heat himself and some deservedly so. Some of those same posters are now somehow using JBJ’s early departure as part of the reason IU isn’t good this season. I guess you don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone...

I think where JBJ comes in is because we could use his offense as a shooter, defense was another animal....... Kinda the opposite of RoJo, good defender, offense is inconsistent

[BGleas]

1 minute ago, Hoosier82 said:

I don’t remember the “cancer” term used specifically but there were a TON of posters continuously bashing JBJ and insisting IU would benefit from addition by subtraction after he left. Bryant took plenty of heat himself and some deservedly so. Some of those same posters are now somehow using JBJ’s early departure as part of the reason IU isn’t good this season. I guess you don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone...

I'm going to play both sides of the fence. I hate to see anyone get injured, but I thought IU was better without JBJ the year we went on the Big Ten Title run. Heck, I was posting about benching him before he got hurt. I thought he hurt us last year at times too. With that said, I think he'd be better on this team. I think he'd be better with a coach that held him accountable for bad shots, turnovers and bad defense. It's a different system so would be a different JBJ that provides the shooting this team needs. 

On Bryant, he struggled last year, no doubt, but I always thought and posted as much last summer, that it was crazy that people felt Davis would be an upgrade. There's no question IMO that last's years team underachieved with the talent it had, and this years team and certainly missing that talent.

[Hoosier82]

2 minutes ago, BGleas said:

I'm going to play both sides of the fence. I hate to see anyone get injured, but I thought IU was better without JBJ the year we went on the Big Ten Title run. Heck, I was posting about benching him before he got hurt. I thought he hurt us last year at times too. With that said, I think he'd be better on this team. I think he'd be better with a coach that held him accountable for bad shots, turnovers and bad defense. It's a different system so would be a different JBJ that provides the shooting this team needs. 

On Bryant, he struggled last year, no doubt, but I always thought and posted as much last summer, that it was crazy that people felt Davis would be an upgrade. There's no question IMO that last's years team underachieved with the talent it had, and this years team and certainly missing that talent.

I think a big part of last year’s woes was OG not being particularly productive then getting injured. Him at 100% and firing on all cylinders would have taken a huge burden off JBJ on the offensive side and would have helped mask Bryant’s defensive shortcomings. The turnovers and lack of productive depth due to injuries were to much to overcome. 

[BGleas]

1 minute ago, Hoosier82 said:

I think a big part of last year’s woes was OG not being particularly productive then getting injured. Him at 100% and firing on all cylinders would have taken a huge burden off JBJ on the offensive side and would have helped mask Bryant’s defensive shortcomings. The turnovers and lack of productive depth due to injuries were to much to overcome. 

I don't know, OG was averaging 11ppg on 55% from the field. His 3-pt shooting wasn't what you'd hope. He didn't explode in a POY type of way or the way he was being hyped, but he was productive on both ends. Bryant's defense was definitely lacking, as was JBJ's and RoJo's, etc., etc., but they were playing in a culture that didn't emphasize defense and weren't held accountable, same with the turnovers. 

[Hoosierhoopster]

^^ As OG is showing right now in the League, he's a monster player. Having him healthy and for the season would've made a real difference.

[BGleas]

1 minute ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

^^ As OG is showing right now in the League, he's a monster player. Having him healthy and for the season would've made a real difference.

It's kind of a two-way conversation IMO. The team was underachieving before OG got hurt, but with that said the second half of the season definitely would have been better if he was healthy. 

[cohete15]

59 minutes ago, Hoosier82 said:

I don’t remember the “cancer” term used specifically but there were a TON of posters continuously bashing JBJ and insisting IU would benefit from addition by subtraction after he left. Bryant took plenty of heat himself and some deservedly so. Some of those same posters are now somehow using JBJ’s early departure as part of the reason IU isn’t good this season. I guess you don’t know what you’ve got until it’s gone...

Blackmon did nothing to tear the team apart and create bad blood and bad attitudes. Therefore, he’s not a cancer. His game seemed like for every basket he would make, he would give one up on the other  end. There was no accountability. We play some darn good defense this year. It hasn’t always been that way, it’s been a work in progress because guys (most of whom were on last years team) have started to buy in. James would be defending at least on an average level and would be shooting at a big time level. The same applies to Bryant. It’s all coaching. And we have the right one now. We just don’t have those players that really needed Archie the most. 

[Hoosier82]

1 hour ago, BGleas said:

It's kind of a two-way conversation IMO. The team was underachieving before OG got hurt, but with that said the second half of the season definitely would have been better if he was healthy. 

I'd argue they were under achieving partly because OG's production wasn't what it should have been. If you look at the losses he played in, his scoring average was 7.8 pts/g and only 4.6 rb/g. His overall averages were low for an NBA lottery pick and he had some very productive games mixed in with some very not productive games which typically lead to losses. It's not all his fault obviously but he didn't have a huge impact when he was on the court that season.

[Leathernecks]

2 hours ago, cohete15 said:

We play some darn good defense this year.

No we don't.  In pretty much every metric you can go by we are an average to below average team defensively.

107th in KenPom.

190th team defensive efficiency

155th in points allowed while playing at a pretty slow pace (257th in possessions per game) 

[PoHoosier]

6 minutes ago, Leathernecks said:

No we don't.  In pretty much every metric you can go by we are an average to below average team defensively.

107th in KenPom.

190th team defensive efficiency

155th in points allowed while playing at a pretty slow pace (257th in possessions per game) 

Stats do not tell the whole story.  My eyes tell me we are continually improving on that side of the ball.  It would be interesting to look at the stats over the last half of the games compared to the first half of games.

To look at the whole season imo is myopic.

[tdhoosier]

5 minutes ago, Leathernecks said:

No we don't.  In pretty much every metric you can go by we are an average to below average team defensively.

107th in KenPom.

190th team defensive efficiency

155th in points allowed while playing at a pretty slow pace (257th in possessions per game) 

We've been playing *better* defense *lately*. 

[5fouls]

Speaking of KenPom,  he has the following Big Ten Teams all ranked between 90-95:  Wisconsin, Indiana, Minnesota, Iowa, & Illinois. 

Fresno State, South Dakota State, and Belmont better watch out, a gaggle of Big Ten teams is closing in on them in the rankings.   

[5fouls]

2 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Speaking of KenPom,  he has the following Big Ten Teams all ranked between 90-95:  Wisconsin, Indiana, Minnesota, Iowa, & Illinois. 

Fresno State, South Dakota State, and Belmont better watch out, a gaggle of Big Ten teams is closing in on them in the rankings.   

Montana, St. Bonaventure, and Buffalo appear to be safely out of reach though.   

[Hoosier82]

29 minutes ago, Leathernecks said:

No we don't.  In pretty much every metric you can go by we are an average to below average team defensively.

107th in KenPom.

190th team defensive efficiency

155th in points allowed while playing at a pretty slow pace (257th in possessions per game) 

You’re 100% correct. We are actually worse on defense this year than last year but no one here wants to hear it. Our SoS is worse, we commit significantly less turnovers and possess the ball longer per possession.  Yet despite all of that we’ve given up the same amount of points per game and are sitting in the same position in conference despite the fact that the conference itself is much weaker. We’ve seen spurts of solid defense here and there but overall the numbers don’t lie.  

[5fouls]

2 minutes ago, Hoosier82 said:

You’re 100% correct. We are actually worse on defense this year than last year but no one here wants to hear it. Our SoS is worse, we commit significantly less turnovers and possess the ball longer per possession.  Yet despite all of that we’ve given up the same amount of points per game and are sitting in the same position in conference despite the fact that the conference itself is much weaker. We’ve seen spurts of solid defense here and there but overall the numbers don’t lie.  

Numbers can be misleading.

Riddle:  When does 1 + 1 not equal 'two'?  

Answer:  When you're in France.  It equals 'deux'

[Hoosier82]

17 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Numbers can be misleading.

Riddle:  When does 1 + 1 not equal 'two'?  

Answer:  When you're in France.  It equals 'deux'

Ok? If your opinion is that the defense is somehow better but the results are the same or worse whats the point in playing better defense?

[Hoosierhoopster]

1 minute ago, Hoosier82 said:

Ok? If your opinion is that the defense is somehow better but the results are the same or worse whats the point in playing better defense?

Fouls was having some fun, hence the riddle. That said, this is an overly simplistic way of looking at things. Our zone D is clearly better, if you have an argument to the contrary, I'd love to hear it. The 'pack line' D has been a thing in transition, as CAM changes our D and the players learn to run a new system. Looking at season percentages and points scored ignores that, among other things. Most here have been saying all season that our perimeter D has been bad -- it has -- because the team has been adjusting to learning how to run a different defense built on pack line. Yes, so the other guys score more points from the perimeter. No, that doesn't mean CAM isn't installing a better defensive system. This entire year is largely a transition year.