Archie Miller's coaching philosophy...Is this current team smart enough for Archie's standards?

[5fouls]

3 minutes ago, 3Ballin said:

What's the difference in building a team around an elite player and building a team around your best player?  Every coach does the second every year right?  Doesn't matter if they are a OAD or a 3 star senior that developed into a monster.

I'll venture to say that building a team around an elite player is easier than coaching a team with an elite player.  Whether it's player or coach, there is a significant portion of every game where Romeo is simply not involved.  

[NotIThatLives]

12 minutes ago, rico said:

Damn fine question.  The jury is out.

I think he's done a pretty dang good job with Romeo and he has shown improvement.  

[Hoosierhoopster]

1 hour ago, Steubenhoosier said:

Has nothing to do with “understanding “. Kids have varying physical attributes. Crean recruited kids, especially bigs, who ran the floor and played his version of Euroball/ position-less basketball. Archie wants kids who are physically tough and  able to hold their own defensively and in a half court offense. Different skill set, different body types required to execute the different offenses. Until CAM gets his players in place, his offense will struggle 

Gotta say this is a real over generalization. Crean identified and recruited OG, Davis etc. Davis certainly is not a run the floor guy. I agree with those saying we’re in year 2, these guys can play CAM’s system 

[bluegrassIU]

I think we all overreact in either direction based on emotion.

Heck, a month ago Chris Holtman was the best coach on the planet with his superior intellect and Butler ways. Now he cant buy a win, similar to us. But he has lost to more inferior teams than we have.

My crystal ball says both have the acumen to succeed at this level and both will have many years of success.

Gotta give time for it to develop. There are many many examples of legendary coaches getting off to far worse starts than Archie has here.

The difference is the scrutiny in todays knee jerk reaction and 24 hour "news cycle"

Hell, a month ago the Steelers were going to the super bowl and the Pateiots were toast. 

[5fouls]

11 minutes ago, NotIThatLives said:

I think he's done a pretty dang good job with Romeo and he has shown improvement.  

Romeo has improved a lot, especially on defense.  But, the team hasn't.  My question is how Archie manages the team with an elite player, not how that player does individually.

[Steubenhoosier]

16 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Gotta say this is a real over generalization. Crean identified and recruited OG, Davis etc. Davis certainly is not a run the floor guy. I agree with those saying we’re in year 2, these guys can play CAM’s system 

He also recruited Moore who is taking up space on the bench, Priller who did so last year, and Green who must be driving ex point guard Archie nuts with his lack of discipline and poor shot selection. Also, not sure on the OG reference. He was quintessential Crean. All athlete and not much of a basketball player when he came in. Didn’t play enough at IU to know whether he developed more under Crean. Will give you that he would have been a kid Archie would have liked... good defensively and high motor.

Can play it and willing to buy into it are two different things 

[5fouls]

Not sure where to put this, so I'll throw it out here.  Since Edward Smith spoke out, Justin is only averaging 6.5 points and 2.5 rebounds a game.  Oh, and 3 turnovers.  And, let's not forget that the team is 0-2.  

So, it raises the question as to whether those comments have factored into the recent play.  

[StLHoosier]

10 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Not sure where to put this, so I'll throw it out here.  Since Edward Smith spoke out, Justin is only averaging 6.5 points and 2.5 rebounds a game.  Oh, and 3 turnovers.  And, let's not forget that the team is 0-2.  

So, it raises the question as to whether those comments have factored into the recent play.  

I think it’s been mentioned that there have been rumblings of chemistry issues, and something like that could compound the issue.  It could be the reason guys look somewhat disinterested or whatever.  If that’s the case, CAM has to nip it in the bud.

[Hoosierhoopster]

12 minutes ago, Steubenhoosier said:

He also recruited Moore who is taking up space on the bench, Priller who did so last year, and Green who must be driving ex point guard Archie nuts with his lack of discipline and poor shot selection. Also, not sure on the OG reference. He was quintessential Crean. All athlete and not much of a basketball player when he came in. Didn’t play enough at IU to know whether he developed more under Crean. Will give you that he would have been a kid Archie would have liked... good defensively and high motor.

Can play it and willing to buy into it are two different things 

Well we disagree here. Come on now, he didn’t “recruit” Priller. He added him to the bench. OG, killer defender, growing into his offense just like Vic, who he also obviously recruited. OG was not all athlete. He was more advanced defensively, yes. Green is a guy who isn’t there enough yet on floor vision but he’s one of our best defenders, in that respect a CAM guy. Looking at him now and saying he doesn’t fit CAM’s style or recruiting is in any event going with hindsight, not the player he was coming out of high school. Coaches have their own recruiting philosophy for sure, but looking at how players have developed and saying they wouldn’t fit CAM’s recruiting or style doesn’t add up.

[NotIThatLives]

23 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

Romeo has improved a lot, especially on defense.  But, the team hasn't.  My question is how Archie manages the team with an elite player, not how that player does individually.

I have to see more.  Like 2-3 more years.  

[iuthruandthru]

56 minutes ago, Steubenhoosier said:

How could anyone know after what, 17-18 games? Wouldn’t it take Romeo staying around for more than a season so that he could actually “build around “ him?

In this day and age top players change every year, especially if IU keeps bringing in top level talent. Teams don’t have the luxury of waiting multiple seasons to build around their key players.  I think that’s the point, one size no longer fits all especially if IU is going to recruit burger boys on a yearly basis.  They just don’t stay for that long, so the coaches that can and will adapt quickly might have an advantage?

[Artesian_86]

Thanks fellow hoosier fans! When I started this post earlier today I was looking for some sense of clarity or just a better understanding as to why this team has been performing this way. There has to be some degree of personality conflicts, dissention among players or most likely,.......parents in the ears of their beloved child!

I don't like what is currently going on right now with this team. I do know this, Archie can flat out coach! It may not look like it to several of you guys out there, but sometimes things just don't go the way you want them to go. Yes, Crean's players are now Archie's players, but he really didn't have a choice. He needed players and he needed unity, not dissention.

This team has no joy, has no fight and they play as if they have no purpose. I feel several of these guys are lost and find it difficult to even keep up with Archie's expectations. 

I have said this before, I am a retired travel and high school softball coach of 23 years and have been a high school teacher for 25 years. I have coached new players who just did not buy in to our system. I teach impressionable students who sometimes just do not buy into my style of teaching. Those players and students either decided to accept and adjust or they sat the bench, quit or got failing grades. It is up to them.

 

[Leathernecks]

One worry I have with Archie's system is that sometimes he seems to put an emphasis on defense at the detriment of the offense.  He almost seems the opposite of Kevin Wilson.  Wilson didn't care about defense and thought the offense could win 49-47 while I feel like Archie thinks we can win 20-18.

McRoberts is the perfect example of this.  I looked up some stats, and I was blown away by how inept he's been on offense.  I knew it was bad, but wow.  He's played 204 minutes in 12 games, and has taken 11 shots for a total of 11 points.  That is just over 2 points per 40 minutes.  In conference play, he's played 111 minutes, and is 0-4 with no points.  Barely better than Fitzner's 2-16 for 5 points.  McRoberts has yet to shoot a free throw this year.  I love all that he does for the team, and I wish his effort would rub off on some other players, but I don't get why he's averaging close to 20 minutes per game.  He has a role, but more as a 5 minute guy, not a 20 minute guy.

[3Ballin]

I know i miss the crazy eyed, 5'9", pastey white guy that looked like he was going to have a stroke while he was chewing your @$$ off that we had coaching the team last year.  By no means do i think that should how all, or even the majority of his interactions with the team are;  but when Nebraska jumps on you 9-0 at home, call a freaking time out and lose your shit!!  If you still dont get it, grab some pine.  The bench mob might lose by 50, but they'll give work their butts off doing it.

[rico]

12 minutes ago, Leathernecks said:

One worry I have with Archie's system is that sometimes he seems to put an emphasis on defense at the detriment of the offense.  He almost seems the opposite of Kevin Wilson.  Wilson didn't care about defense and thought the offense could win 49-47 while I feel like Archie thinks we can win 20-18.

McRoberts is the perfect example of this.  I looked up some stats, and I was blown away by how inept he's been on offense.  I knew it was bad, but wow.  He's played 204 minutes in 12 games, and has taken 11 shots for a total of 11 points.  That is just over 2 points per 40 minutes.  In conference play, he's played 111 minutes, and is 0-4 with no points.  Barely better than Fitzner's 2-16 for 5 points.  McRoberts has yet to shoot a free throw this year.  I love all that he does for the team, and I wish his effort would rub off on some other players, but I don't get why he's averaging close to 20 minutes per game.  He has a role, but more as a 5 minute guy, not a 20 minute guy.

Last I checked, the objective was to outscore the opponent.  If I have said it once, I have said it 100 x.......Fitzner and McRoberts would never see the floor again.

[BobSaccamanno]

I’ve been a big Archie backer.  And I’m not receding from that position at all.  First of all, his program is a work in progress.  When he talks basketball, I like what I hear as I think his approach suits the style of ball I like.  Second, it’s way too premature to bail on him.  I think it was BGleas or another one of our sharpest posters who pointed out the early coaching travails of a host of eventual success stories including John Beilein, Jay Wright and others.   Maybe Archie won’t be successful in the end, which I seriously doubt, but it’s too soon to render a judgement on that now.  I think his style of ball will be conducive to winning and winning big.  

Now, I kind of like to think along with Archie with his moves and I like what he does.  The one thing that I’m mildly concerned about in terms of style of play is getting good three point shots.  The data suggests that Archie may not prioritize it enough. I hope that’s not the case.  Those can be extra, cheap points.  You don’t want to be swapping twos at your end while the other guy gets threes.  You can still play hard nosed, ball control ball with heavy emphasis on D but still work in strategy to get good shooters more good looks.  You don’t need deep Daryl Morey style analytics on this. Its  basic math.   Now, this may just be circumstances but over time I hope we evolve into a team featuring more three point shooting where it’s an advantage for us. 

The other thing that is premature to make a judgment on is Archie’s permissiveness of, and let’s call it what it is, laziness.  Lazy passes, not hustling, casual jogging....  Its offensive to see that.

Archie likely feels like he doesn’t have options but if you’re playing the long game, you can bench some guys for much more extended periods than Archie has been willing to do.  If a player or his father can’t handle getting benched for lack of effort, that kid doesn’t belong in an Indiana uniform and we’d be better off in the end.  It’s a tactic to help the player get the most out of his ability.  Good players, and I’m referring to winners, want to be coached  and deep down would get it.  It’s the loser player that doesn’t understand.

This may offend people but Bob Knight doesn’t lose those last two games.  You can say I’m pulling that out of nowhere except that I watched decades of Knight’s teams.  It’s not that he didn’t lose games.  But when you could sense we were reeling, Knight got his teams to get it done. 

We are sitting on three straight losses, a couple of which should not have happened.  We are reeling and you’ve got to find a way to put a stop to it.  For the overly permissive crowd, I respect your even keeled nature, but getting the players a little uncomfortable may be what we need.  

[mrflynn03]

3 hours ago, rico said:

No I am of the belief that a good/great coach utilizes whoever he has.  Knight did it, and implemented a new system with recruits that weren't his in his and made it to FF in his second year.  Davis took over for Knight and in his second year we were playing for a championship.  Knight was a great coach, Davis is a good coach.  They implemented their systems and had them working in short order.  

I totally agree with this. 

Rmk made a ff4 in year 2. He knew what talent he had available.  He also knew when to let players loose.  And to play to or expose other coaches/teams weaknesses(84 UNC S16 and 92 UNLV for ex.) 

I like archie a lot but be needs to be less stubborn/rigid and adapt to what tools he has available. 

PS.   Tom Coverdale made the 02 run happen. Fife, Moye,Jefferies,Leach were as much valuable but Coverdale's toughness is second to none. Donald Perry did do a good job in his place though.

 

[rico]

1 minute ago, mrflynn03 said:

I totally agree with this. 

Rmk made a ff4 in year 2. He knew what talent he had available.  He also knew when to let players loose.  And to play to or expose other coaches/teams weaknesses(84 UNC S16 and 92 UNLV for ex.) 

I like archie a lot but be needs to be less stubborn/rigid and adapt to what tools he has available. 

PS.   Tom Coverdale made the 02 run happen. Fife, Moye,Jefferies,Leach were as much valuable but Coverdale's toughness is second to none. Donald Perry did do a good job in his place though.

 

P.S.  Cov hardly got to play under Knight.  Under Davis, oh yeah.

[mrflynn03]

2 minutes ago, rico said:

P.S.  Cov hardly got to play under Knight.  Under Davis, oh yeah.

I wish he played more for Knight. But he was a prototypical RMK recruit.  Tough as nails.

I also remember Michael Lewis. My dad moved to Jasper when I was young and my dad was big supporter of the school in whatever town he lived in. My dad graduated and played at Switz city before itwas consolidated into WRV. Wanted me to play at the hatchet house which I did a couple years. 

Anyway, I remember my dad taking me to jasper every other weekend(divorced parents) and I got to shoot around with Michael Lewis and Harris Mujezenovic's little brother Faruk.  Good times. 

[Bowhunter]

 

Last night I was thinking about the good ole days.  When we lost, I would always say I feel sorry for the next team that would have to play us.  We rarely had losing streaks.  As much as I disagreed with his bitterness, the man was a basketball genesis.  If he could have kept recruiting and adapting to the new generation, we would probably have a couple more banners on the wall.  

  Purdue is hot right now and Archie is going to need to rally the troops.  

I also would like to add that Morgan is a Crean guy and he has been awesome, so we can’t say How bad Archie has it with all Crean’s guys because I would argue there isn’t a program in America that wouldn’t want him on their team.                 Morgan looks a little tired, he’s trying to carry this team every night. It doesn’t bother me if he has an off night every once and awhile.  Kid has heart!

[mrflynn03]

2 minutes ago, Bowhunter said:

 

Last night I was thinking about the good ole days.  When we lost, I would always say I feel sorry for the next team that would have to play us.  We rarely had losing streaks.  As much as I disagreed with his bitterness, the man was a basketball genesis.  If he could have kept recruiting and adapting to the new generation, we would probably have a couple more banners on the wall.  

  Purdue is hot right now and Archie is going to need to rally the troops.  

I also would like to add that Morgan is a Crean guy and he has been awesome, so we can’t say How bad Archie has it with all Crean’s guys because I would argue there isn’t a program in America that wouldn’t want him on their team.                 Morgan looks a little tired, he’s trying to carry this team every night. It doesn’t bother me if he has an off night every once and awhile.  Kid has heart!

Crean definitely has/had an eye for talent.  Maybe more luck than skill?  I don't know, but Juwan is a diamond in the rough type player. Did he develope on his own? Would Crean get the same results? Or has he blossomed with archie?  Just asking for your thoughts because I don't think CTC would have the JM we have now. 

[rico]

2 minutes ago, mrflynn03 said:

Crean definitely has/had an eye for talent.  Maybe more luck than skill?  I don't know, but Juwan is a diamond in the rough type player. Did he develope on his own? Would Crean get the same results? Or has he blossomed with archie?  Just asking for your thoughts because I don't think CTC would have the JM we have now. 

Honestly, I think we would have the same Juwan.  It is in his blood.  He has been who is since the first day he stepped on campus.  Now the surrounding parts are a different story.

[5fouls]

You guys will think I'm crazy considering all of the injuries this year.  But, Archie simply is not going to play more than 8-9 guys.  It's part of his philosophy to keep his rotation tight and I don't see any evidence of that changing.  As a result, he needs to cap the number of schollies he hands out at 11.  These kids that never get on the floor have always been the star of their team.  It's a huge adjustment to become an end of the bench guy, and some players simply do not handle it well.  If your coach is only going to play 9, and you have handed out 13 scholarships, that's 4 guys that are, at best, disappointed, but may even be downright unhappy.  Cut that number in half by only giving out 11 scholarships.  Not only does that reduce the amount of cumulative time players are rotting on the bench, but it potentially opens the door to give the remaining two some of the 'extra' minutes that you previously had to spread 4 ways.  

[StLHoosier]

1 hour ago, 5fouls said:

You guys will think I'm crazy considering all of the injuries this year.  But, Archie simply is not going to play more than 8-9 guys.  It's part of his philosophy to keep his rotation tight and I don't see any evidence of that changing.  As a result, he needs to cap the number of schollies he hands out at 11.  These kids that never get on the floor have always been the star of their team.  It's a huge adjustment to become an end of the bench guy, and some players simply do not handle it well.  If your coach is only going to play 9, and you have handed out 13 scholarships, that's 4 guys that are, at best, disappointed, but may even be downright unhappy.  Cut that number in half by only giving out 11 scholarships.  Not only does that reduce the amount of cumulative time players are rotting on the bench, but it potentially opens the door to give the remaining two some of the 'extra' minutes that you previously had to spread 4 ways.  

I don't think you can do this, just due to the unknown.  This year is a great example with all of the injuries.  If you have 3-4 guys go down in your scenario, you're literally playing walk-ons at that point.  I think you fill out your scholarships, but manage the roster in a way that doesn't leave you lacking in any particular area.  It's easier said than done. 

[5fouls]

5 minutes ago, StLHoosier said:

I don't think you can do this, just due to the unknown.  This year is a great example with all of the injuries.  If you have 3-4 guys go down in your scenario, you're literally playing walk-ons at that point.  I think you fill out your scholarships, but manage the roster in a way that doesn't leave you lacking in any particular area.  It's easier said than done. 

Other teams do it all the time.  Some of them may end up giving an extra scholly to a walk-on, but that doesn't really count.  Not too many coaches play 11-12 guys like Crean did.