Jump to content

2021 Recruiting Hub


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, NotIThatLives said:

I'm wondering if you are starting to troll now.  These teams with less talent?  Maryland is about to send two guys through the draft, beat this team by one.

Illinios had/has two guys that turned down the draft, beat this team by 1, on the road.  

Lost to Wisconsin by 4 late in the season.  Same Wisconsin team preseason top 10 that return their top 5 scorers.  

Beat Iowa, preseason top 5, has the preseason NPOY.

There was a lot to be desired last year in regards to mental fortitude, especially on the road.  I honestly think there were a few guys that just made life on the team hell.  

I find it interesting that the preseason top 3 teams in the B1G this year, we were only separated by a total of 6 points in the last three games.  2 being one point losses.  hum 

Are we that far off of them?  Add a #1 point guard in the nation.  Race, Rob, and Jerome got a full healthy off season for the first time ever.  

Did I mention I'm starting to get excited about this team?

I do need to give you credit on the Archie saying big changes coming with actually zero changes happening.  Start a freaking walk on for all I care.  Just send the message loud and clear.  

Your citing teams that are better. But are they more talented.  Those coaches took guys and trained them up.  Purdue was not more talented yet whipped us 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Hippopotamo said:

I think this team will show how hamstrung Archie was with DG and JS. We had no ball handling or perimeter offense so we relied on hoping Green would limit turnovers and get hot from 3. JS was playing out of position and was our best defender and athlete so he had to play. This year’s balance looks to be much better. 

He had years to fix that problem why didn’t he

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brass Cannon said:

He had years to fix that problem why didn’t he

 

32 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

Yes. And it isn't as though Miller had no available scholarships to use.

It takes time, fellas...Leadership, both Archie's and from the players, and chemistry can be fragile things. It can make ordinary teams winners and good teams seem mediocre.

Look at Wisconsin last year after Kobe King left...They were 5-5 in the B10 when he left the team, and he was their leading scorer...ended 14-6 and a share of the B10 title...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, IU Scott said:

You kind of make it like a bad thing to  be a very good role player.  Most championship teams need to have guys like that tome off the bench and contribute.  Without Hillman and Eyl in 87 we would have not won the championship because each one of them played a key role in at least one game in the tournament.

That's fine and I completely agree that you need role players, but the role players are the easy piece of the equation. Any Indiana coach can get good, solid role players just recruiting the state. The hard part is getting the game-changer, future pro's, that are the reason you're in a position to win titles. You need at least two of those guys, if not 3-4 to win a title. 

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about 1 and dones. I'm talking about future NBA players. Those come in a variety of ways, but you typically need 2-3 to be a legit, consistent title contender. The role players are the easier part, and IU seems to have an abundance of those. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brass Cannon said:

Your citing teams that are better. But are they more talented.  Those coaches took guys and trained them up.  Purdue was not more talented yet whipped us 

Uh, yes they were more talented. IU wasn't all that talented last year. TJD hid a lot of things by just being a great freshmen big. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brass Cannon said:

Your citing teams that are better. But are they more talented.  Those coaches took guys and trained them up.  Purdue was not more talented yet whipped us 

All three teams either have guys going in the draft this year or turn down the draft this year and one's going to be the national player of the year as long as he stays healthy what am I missing here?  If we aren't that far off from the top three teams in the conference then we aren't that far off.  

The Purdue losses come down to the mental fortitude aspect totally crap in the pants with bob Knight in attendance that was totally embarrassing and if coach doesn't get something corrected on that end, I am going to be pretty concerned going forward.  I'm not saying I'm totally sold on him being the deal but this year is going to tell us a lot.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, IUFLA said:

 

It takes time, fellas...Leadership, both Archie's and from the players, and chemistry can be fragile things. It can make ordinary teams winners and good teams seem mediocre.

Look at Wisconsin last year after Kobe King left...They were 5-5 in the B10 when he left the team, and he was their leading scorer...ended 14-6 and a share of the B10 title...

It does, but if people want to use the excuse of "IU had no shooters" they could maybe explain why they didn't. It wasn't a secret going into last year that it would be a poor shooting team. Yet no shooters were added even with 2 available scholarships. That's a coaching decision so at least part of the blame belongs to Miller.

Edited by go_iu_bb
Fix autocorrect misspelling
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, BGleas said:

That's fine and I completely agree that you need role players, but the role players are the easy piece of the equation. Any Indiana coach can get good, solid role players just recruiting the state. The hard part is getting the game-changer, future pro's, that are the reason you're in a position to win titles. You need at least two of those guys, if not 3-4 to win a title. 

Just to be clear, I'm not talking about 1 and dones. I'm talking about future NBA players. Those come in a variety of ways, but you typically need 2-3 to be a legit, consistent title contender. The role players are the easier part, and IU seems to have an abundance of those. 

Never said you don't need game changers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, go_iu_bb said:

It does, but if purple want to use the excuse of "IU had no shooters" they could maybe explain why they didn't. It wasn't a secret going into last year that it would be a poor shooting team. Yet no shooters were added even with 2 available scholarships. That's a coaching decision so at least part of the blame belongs to Miller.

I know we had our hat in the ring on a few, but just didn't work out.

You're correct in that roster management is in his job description. Pretty much all his now, so as I said, that can no longer be an excuse. If we don't see improvement this year, I would imagine his seat will get warm.

Edited by IUFLA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will be really interested to see what a star player at IU will make on average per year/month when NIL starts and how that compares to other top programs across the country and in the BIG.  It will be hard to get top dollar like some players at Duke or Kentucky but it will be important to show you can come to IU and make top money in the BIG and that multiple opportunities will be out there to do so.  While I get we all don’t want someone that’s about me and making money these young men will have various reasons from brand building to literally needing to support their family that revenue generation will be key.  Playing solidly this year will tie directly into potential income the next year when this starts.  I think this will be a huge factor towards recruiting in the future.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, iuthruandthru said:

I will be really interested to see what a star player at IU will make on average per year/month when NIL starts and how that compares to other top programs across the country and in the BIG.  It will be hard to get top dollar like some players at Duke or Kentucky but it will be important to show you can come to IU and make top money in the BIG and that multiple opportunities will be out there to do so.  While I get we all don’t want someone that’s about me and making money these young men will have various reasons from brand building to literally needing to support their family that revenue generation will be key.  Playing solidly this year will tie directly into potential income the next year when this starts.  I think this will be a huge factor towards recruiting in the future.

I agree with you and I hope that the coaching staff is emphasizing that (in a way that is within whatever restrictions they have) to recruits. They could at least point out the size and passion of the IU fan base as well as the resources the AD has already set up to help the athletes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, go_iu_bb said:

It does, but if purple want to use the excuse of "IU had no shooters" they could maybe explain why they didn't. It wasn't a secret going into last year that it would be a poor shooting team. Yet no shooters were added even with 2 available scholarships. That's a coaching decision so at least part of the blame belongs to Miller.

Saying no shooters were added is a little dramatic because Armaan came in and Jerome was a redshirt freshman that was supposed to a shooter/perimeter guy the previous year. Armaan and Jerome both started slow which affected their season 3pt% big time (Jerome 30.2% Armaan 26.6%), but in the last 15 games Hunter had the best 3pt% on the team and Armaan was tied with Al for 2nd (Jerome 42.86% Armaan 40.91%)

 

The fact that both Jerome and Armaan are likely to get more minutes/shots this year without Justin/Damezi/Devonte, as well as the fact that we're bringing in Leal to be another shooter and Lander to help space the floor, I find it a little weird to act like Archie hasn't done anything to bring in shooters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PritchardPutBack said:

Saying no shooters were added is a little dramatic because Armaan came in and Jerome was a redshirt freshman that was supposed to a shooter/perimeter guy the previous year. Armaan and Jerome both started slow which affected their season 3pt% big time (Jerome 30.2% Armaan 26.6%), but in the last 15 games Hunter had the best 3pt% on the team and Armaan was tied with Al for 2nd (Jerome 42.86% Armaan 40.91%)

 

The fact that both Jerome and Armaan are likely to get more minutes/shots this year without Justin/Damezi/Devonte, as well as the fact that we're bringing in Leal to be another shooter and Lander to help space the floor, I find it a little weird to act like Archie hasn't done anything to bring in shooters

Agreed.  He also did not know that Hunter was going to have a season ending issue to start his career and Romeo would have a smaller impact than most would have guessed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, iuthruandthru said:

I will be really interested to see what a star player at IU will make on average per year/month when NIL starts and how that compares to other top programs across the country and in the BIG.  It will be hard to get top dollar like some players at Duke or Kentucky but it will be important to show you can come to IU and make top money in the BIG and that multiple opportunities will be out there to do so.  While I get we all don’t want someone that’s about me and making money these young men will have various reasons from brand building to literally needing to support their family that revenue generation will be key.  Playing solidly this year will tie directly into potential income the next year when this starts.  I think this will be a huge factor towards recruiting in the future.

I would not think that Kentucky would be able to match Indiana in NIL money. Louisville is their major market for adds and they share it. Coal money from the coalfield area is drying up. I think a lot of money for NIL will come from regional markets. I bet the national markets will be fairly even for the big boys. Also Kentucky as a state has about half the population of Indiana. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, go_iu_bb said:

It does, but if purple want to use the excuse of "IU had no shooters" they could maybe explain why they didn't. It wasn't a secret going into last year that it would be a poor shooting team. Yet no shooters were added even with 2 available scholarships. That's a coaching decision so at least part of the blame belongs to Miller.

Please, if it's not too much trouble, could you name a couple of potential recruits who were listed as "shooters".  I don't follow recruiting closely and you seem to have knowledge that would be helpful.  Thanks!  😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, MaroonRebel said:

I would not think that Kentucky would be able to match Indiana in NIL money. Louisville is their major market for adds and they share it. Coal money from the coalfield area is drying up. I think a lot of money for NIL will come from regional markets. I bet the national markets will be fairly even for the big boys. Also Kentucky as a state has about half the population of Indiana. 

While I understand your points it’s not just about local market, heck I would say that’s small potatoes.  These players will make tons of cash off Instagram and Twitter posts.  The way IU has it setup with this company they literally see how much money they will make based on the media platform they post on which is based off followers and over social media score.  The UK players will make gobs of cash off things like this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, PritchardPutBack said:

Saying no shooters were added is a little dramatic because Armaan came in and Jerome was a redshirt freshman that was supposed to a shooter/perimeter guy the previous year. Armaan and Jerome both started slow which affected their season 3pt% big time (Jerome 30.2% Armaan 26.6%), but in the last 15 games Hunter had the best 3pt% on the team and Armaan was tied with Al for 2nd (Jerome 42.86% Armaan 40.91%)

 

The fact that both Jerome and Armaan are likely to get more minutes/shots this year without Justin/Damezi/Devonte, as well as the fact that we're bringing in Leal to be another shooter and Lander to help space the floor, I find it a little weird to act like Archie hasn't done anything to bring in shooters

I was talking about last season specifically. Hunter was still questionable for the season in regards to how much he'd be able to play and how effective he'd be. Franklin was an incoming freshman who was unlikely to contribute greatly during the season. Sure, they got better as the season went on but, outside of a few games last year, it still wasn't a good shooting team. That caused all kinds of issues on offense.

During those 15 games Franklin did shoot well but didn't shoot that much. Only ~1.5 3-point shots per game (22 total shots). That's including 2 games of 5 shots. Outside of those 2 games he was only shooting once per game, which isn't enough to really help.

It was expected that would happen entering the season. Or are you saying that you thought last years team actually shot well? Teams didn't pack the lane and IU didn't go on long scoring droughts?

Miller had 2 open scholarships which could've been used to more immediately address that glaring weakness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...