Jump to content

Anthony Leal is a Hoosier !


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, IndyResident16 said:

But you also have to concede that you’re likely never to see a team like 75-76 Hoosiers. You aren’t going to see a team have two All-American’s who go 1 and 2 in the draft as 4 year players like Benson and May. Benson and May would have been long gone before they were seniors had they played in today’s era. Virginia just won the title and had 3 players declare early, just as Villanova did the year before who had 4 guys leave early. I believe Indiana needs a solid foundation of 3-4 year players, but to win you’re going to need 1 or 2 guys who are good enough to play in the NBA after a year or two. That seems to be the winning formula in today’s age.

Most of the guys who left early for UVA and Villanova were 3 year guys and a couple after 2 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
34 minutes ago, Zuckerkorn said:

I don't think any of the posters are "living in the past", but simply pointing out things that they enjoyed more then than today.  Yet they are all tuned in to today's game and follow it closely.

There are parts of the college game today that are better now than back in the day (recruiting news, video, message boards, etc.) just as there were things that were, arguably, better back then.  I think the root of this whole diversion is what will get us back to being a consistent top-10 team, and some are simply expressing their opinions that we need stability/maturity in the roster to get there (because that's the way it used to be).  Players like Leal remind us of the type of player that provided stability and maturity by contributing for several seasons.  Guys like Gordon, Vonleigh, Zeller, and Langford would be on another level if we had enjoyed the kind of success we used to have but alas we fell short (way short in some cases) while they were here.  One thing I guarantee though is that younger posters/fans will likely never know how amazing it feels to follow a team that was expected to win every game and did.

I am milehiiu.  And I approve of this post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

But you also have to concede that you’re likely never to see a team like 75-76 Hoosiers. You aren’t going to see a team have two All-American’s who go 1 and 2 in the draft as 4 year players like Benson and May. Benson and May would have been long gone before they were seniors had they played in today’s era. Virginia just won the title and had 3 players declare early, just as Villanova did the year before who had 4 guys leave early. I believe Indiana needs a solid foundation of 3-4 year players, but to win you’re going to need 1 or 2 guys who are good enough to play in the NBA after a year or two. That seems to be the winning formula in today’s age.

Absolutely.  Having guys that are guaranteed high first rounders don't stick around and slightly lesser players will "strike while the iron is hot".  But it all goes into the differences in era's.  Really good players with really good coaching that played together for 4 years produced some really good play that may not be (as) possible today.  It sets a standard in a fan's mind.

Ultimately, you're correct about blending experience with elite talent but IMO you have to develop the veteran play first.  A real difference maker probably won't get you a ring by himself and he won't come here until you're winning. 

We're all weary of hearing/saying it but it's gonna take time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Most of the guys who left early for UVA and Villanova were 3 year guys and a couple after 2 years.

I think we're spinning ourselves in circles. The easiest and clearest explanation is when Bgleas said: (generally) the players who stay aren't good enough to leave early. 

AND to get those players you need to have good player development and a system they can thrive in. I think we (myself included) tend to whip ourselves into a frenzy debating who we should recruit. I think our success all falls on CAM - the head coach is so important in college basketball. I could care less about how many stars are listed after their name; I want him to recruit players that will help him win and not transfer so we can finally have the semblance of some stability for the first time in forever. If that means getting the occasional OAD then sign them up. BUT I think the focus should be on how good of a coach Archie will prove to be? Will he be like Tom Crean and need talent to thrive (where OAD's will be more crucial to our success)? Or will he be like Bob Knight and be able to recruit a bunch of less talented parts with specific skills to make a strong whole? I really hope he is a good enough coach for it to be the latter, because IMO, the Crean method is a lot harder to sustain. Bottom line though.......I just want to f%&*ing win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To bring it back a bit to the recruiting side of this discussion, I think for Archie to build a consistent winner IU needs to have a consistent pipeline of players, probably 3-4 per year on the roster, of guys ranked in that 20-40/50 range. Think guys like TJD, Thomas Bryant, Maurice Creek, Yogi, Jerome Hunter, etc., and then fill in with the Phinisee's, Leals, Galloway's, Franklin's, etc. 

IMO, that's the UVA, Villanova, and even for a while there the UNC model. Consistent steady pipeline of these guys that are borderline McDonald's All-American's, but likely to stay 2-3 years, and then fill the roster out with the guys Archie has been signing for the most part. The of course go after a Langford, Gordon type if they're local (Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, etc.).

I do have a small concern that we haven't gotten enough guys in that 20-50 range. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BGleas said:

To bring it back a bit to the recruiting side of this discussion, I think for Archie to build a consistent winner IU needs to have a consistent pipeline of players, probably 3-4 per year on the roster, of guys ranked in that 20-40/50 range. Think guys like TJD, Thomas Bryant, Maurice Creek, Yogi, Jerome Hunter, etc., and then fill in with the Phinisee's, Leals, Galloway's, Franklin's, etc. 

IMO, that's the UVA, Villanova, and even for a while there the UNC model. Consistent steady pipeline of these guys that are borderline McDonald's All-American's, but likely to stay 2-3 years, and then fill the roster out with the guys Archie has been signing for the most part. The of course go after a Langford, Gordon type if they're local (Indiana, Ohio, Illinois, etc.).

I do have a small concern that we haven't gotten enough guys in that 20-50 range. 

No matter what we think of the UNC program, I thought they had the right mix of getting  players ranked 20-80 but they stayed 3-4 years.  I know this year they had 2 one and done playes and Little could not even start for that team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

No matter what we think of the UNC program, I thought they had the right mix of getting  players ranked 20-80 but they stayed 3-4 years.  I know this year they had 2 one and done playes and Little could not even start for that team.

Yeah, I think that's a model that can/will provide long term success, especially in Archie's system, similar to Bennett. Again, my only small concern so far is not getting enough of the guys in the 20-40/80 range of that criteria. Archie's gotten more of the 80-150 range guys. I don't want to get too hung up on ratings, because they're quite often wrong, but it just helps frame the convo. 

I'm a huge Phinisee fan, but right now there isn't a guard on the roster or in the pipeline as a commit that's in that 20-80 range, which I think you need a couple. Similar to UVA having Guy and Jerome, both top 50 guys, or Villanova with Brunson and Booth. 

By the way, Villanova's in-coming class has #15, #16, #55, and #69. That's a heck of a class, especially if those two high-end guys end up being 2-3 year players. Kind of reminds me of a typical MSU class or and OSU class under Matta when they were rolling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

I believe there is one poster who does and makes sure everyone knows it

Yes I think the product on the court in college basketball was better back in the 80's and 90's but does not mean I am living in the past.  I probably watch more games than most today and don't miss an IU game so if I was living in the past I wouldn't watch the game today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

Maybe if you bought a Delorean...😁

If I were living in the past I would be on here trying to compare all the IU coaches against RMK or each team to the 76 team but I don't do that.  If I lived in the past I would be totally against any change that could help our basketball program like that I think it would be good for a new arena to be built.  I am not against loosing the candy strips or I wouldn't be against putting names on the jerseys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BGleas said:

Yeah, I think that's a model that can/will provide long term success, especially in Archie's system, similar to Bennett. Again, my only small concern so far is not getting enough of the guys in the 20-40/80 range of that criteria. Archie's gotten more of the 80-150 range guys. I don't want to get too hung up on ratings, because they're quite often wrong, but it just helps frame the convo. 

I'm a huge Phinisee fan, but right now there isn't a guard on the roster or in the pipeline as a commit that's in that 20-80 range, which I think you need a couple. Similar to UVA having Guy and Jerome, both top 50 guys, or Villanova with Brunson and Booth. 

By the way, Villanova's in-coming class has #15, #16, #55, and #69. That's a heck of a class, especially if those two high-end guys end up being 2-3 year players. Kind of reminds me of a typical MSU class or and OSU class under Matta when they were rolling.

Agree, including as to giving some leeway in the 'ranking' considerations, while shooting for a balance of highly ranked prospects with somewhat lesser-ranked prospects. 

And going back 'on topic' Leal is such a good fit here.

The way this topic has moved back and forth through this discussion of what we feel is the best way in recruiting to build the program for long-term success to me, if anything, highlights how well Leal fits. 

Leal is an outstanding all-around player, a winner, a kid who by all accounts "gets it," a top flight IN player, a team player with a track record of good chemistry, and a fighter -- a guy who brings it. I don't care if he's 'ranked' top 50 or top 100 by the services, he's clearly a great player and a great fit.

And what is not to say about Rob P? Do any of us care about where he was ranked at this point? Nope.

At the same time, keep bringing in the Hunters, the Romeos, the Codys, the Gordons of the high school bball world. They have always been and always well be key to the ability of the program to win at the highest level, and to the future of the program -- right along with the very good bball players who stay for 3-4 years and grow our veteran depth. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

If I were living in the past I would be on here trying to compare all the IU coaches against RMK or each team to the 76 team but I don't do that.  If I lived in the past I would be totally against any change that could help our basketball program like that I think it would be good for a new arena to be built.  I am not against loosing the candy strips or I wouldn't be against putting names on the jerseys.

I know what you're saying. I love the traditions of IU basketball, but if one of the traditions was standing in the way of IU returning to glory, I'd be all for change. Fortunately I don't think any are. The candy strips are still a unique draw to the program. Romeo's jacket lining at the draft proved that to me.

And I also understand your position on the way the game is played today. To me, there's too much physical play. I don't think Dr Naismith intended for the sport to be quite as physical as it has become. And don't even get me started on traveling, palming, or 3 seconds. 

All things evolve, I guess. 

Yet, I still enjoy the college game a lot. 

The only thing I miss greatly is the civility and sportsmanship that we used to enjoy in all sports. We still see it from time to time, but I wish it was still the rule rather than the exception.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know what I love most about Anthony. That he loves IU. And brings a great game to and for IU.  Or that he has a GPA exceeding 4.0. Which most likely will translate to  helping  IU's BB APR score.  A winner on both levels.  AND he's from B-town !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

I know what you're saying. I love the traditions of IU basketball, but if one of the traditions was standing in the way of IU returning to glory, I'd be all for change. Fortunately I don't think any are. The candy strips are still a unique draw to the program. Romeo's jacket lining at the draft proved that to me.

And I also understand your position on the way the game is played today. To me, there's too much physical play. I don't think Dr Naismith intended for the sport to be quite as physical as it has become. And don't even get me started on traveling, palming, or 3 seconds. 

All things evolve, I guess. 

Yet, I still enjoy the college game a lot. 

The only thing I miss greatly is the civility and sportsmanship that we used to enjoy in all sports. We still see it from time to time, but I wish it was still the rule rather than the exception.

I still love watching the college game and that is pretty much all I watch during the winter.  To me the biggest change has been the style of offense that is used today and the 30 second clock has hurt the offensive game.  When the clock was at 45 seconds you could still run an offense and move the ball side to side and reverse it a few times to get a good shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

Don't know what I love most about Anthony. That he loves IU. And brings a great game to and for IU.  Or that he has a GPA exceeding 4.0. Which most likely will translate to  helping  IU's BB APR score.  A winner on both levels.  AND he's from B-town !

How about all of the above

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
38 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

Not being critical here. Kind of funny that a committed kid who lives in B-town, who could walk onto campus any time he chooses.  Is taking an official at HH.  Don't get me wrong. I love it.  Just not common as far as this worked out.  

Significant because Trey Galloway and Kristian Lander are taking officials at same time.  3 close Indiana Elite teammates, 2 of which are solid IU commits, can do nothing but help with Lander IMHO.

Oh and, wouldn't an unofficial from Kaufman just be icing on the cake?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

Not being critical here. Kind of funny that a committed kid who lives in B-town, who could walk onto campus any time he chooses.  Is taking an official at HH.  Don't get me wrong. I love it.  Just not common as far as this worked out.  

Great to see. He should get same treatment as any other recruit. 

In my career I’ve always found that an employer will never treat you better than when they’re recruiting you. 

He should never feel that he was taken for granted for being local

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, milehiiu said:

Not being critical here. Kind of funny that a committed kid who lives in B-town, who could walk onto campus any time he chooses.  Is taking an official at HH.  Don't get me wrong. I love it.  Just not common as far as this worked out.  

It's a sign of solidarity with Lander. What better way to show your teammate/friend that a) you're glad he's there and b) he should put on the candystripes alongside you in one year's time.

Edit: Also seems to fit with his entire personality: Entirely unnecessary, but if it promotes any type of positive outcome, he's doing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Zlinedavid said:

It's a sign of solidarity with Lander. What better way to show your teammate/friend that a) you're glad he's there and b) he should put on the candystripes alongside you in one year's time.

Edit: Also seems to fit with his entire personality: Entirely unnecessary, but if it promotes any type of positive outcome, he's doing it.

Agteed. I really like what I see about Anthony. Seems like a hard working, nothing for free, do the right thing kind of kid. Really happy he is a Hoosier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...