Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 285
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, Leathernecks said:

I'd like to see plays drawn up for individuals to give them some more confidence.

Every game they have ran plays for Smith, Green, etc.  Smith has come along way since HS.  Seen him play back then, and Mac Irvins comments about him not playing with energy in AAU has meaning.  No coaching can change personality or DNA.  Victor had less skill, but a killer instinct.  Jeremy Holloway (or however you spell his name) had more skill and less energy.  We know how those stories turned out.  

Recruit tenacity who can shoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Leathernecks said:

Maybe I'm being generous but I would categorize the three point attempts this way:

Bad Shots - 1 (Romeo blocked early in the second half)

Result of mediocre offense with the shot clock running down - 3

More aggressive than normal - 1 Rob when his man went under the screen in the second half

The right decision within the flow of the possession - 15 

To me that means that only one of these threes absolutely should not have been taken...other than that you might say that it would have been better off being a different guy, but they were open. I actually really liked some of the actions they ran to get Rob some looks...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, mchenry34 said:

Maybe I'm being generous but I would categorize the three point attempts this way:

Bad Shots - 1 (Romeo blocked early in the second half)

Result of mediocre offense with the shot clock running down - 3

More aggressive than normal - 1 Rob when his man went under the screen in the second half

The right decision within the flow of the possession - 15 

To me that means that only one of these threes absolutely should not have been taken...other than that you might say that it would have been better off being a different guy, but they were open. I actually really liked some of the actions they ran to get Rob some looks...

I agree on the looks Rob got.  The out of bounds play to get him an open 3 was nice, and it was one of the only ones we made.  Purdue sagged big time and let us have a handful of shots begging us to beat them from 3.

I sometimes think our guys get so lulled into not looking to shoot that they aren't in rhythm when they get a look.  On the out of bounds play, Rob knew he was going to be shooting, and you could see he shot it with a lot of confidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I’m an offensive kind of guy.  I realize defense travels and is very important in winning but when it comes down to it, the ball has to go in the hoop if you want to win.  I have never been a fan of walking the ball up the court and not utilizing the fast break.  I have never liked the Wisconsin teams of scoring in the 50s and making the game ugly even though they were wining. The NBA is all bombs away from 3 point land and has been that way for a long time.  The best teams have guys that can shoot. It’s not rocket science. I don’t know if Archie’s offense will look different with shooters. I didn’t follow him much at Dayton.  I just remember his teams always in a dog fight.  Hoping something changes soon. I’m not asking for a Crean offense consisting of several turnovers. I like teams that can spread the floor with shooters.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Leathernecks said:

Wow thanks for putting together. I counted 14 undisputed good looks out of 20. Pretty good if you ask me for offensive sets. The remaining 6 were still makeable but somewhat tough looks. 

One thing that does concern me slightly is if Archie doesn't like to have any pure shooters or the team. Leals recruitment will be interesting, Id love to have a sniper on a team every year with how important the 3 ball is these days. I'm just not sure how much Archie values that, but we'll find out exactly soon enough once his guys are fully in. I think Fitzner may have been what Archie was hoping for this season, but it obviously hasn't panned out yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bowhunter said:

So I’m an offensive kind of guy.  I realize defense travels and is very important in winning but when it comes down to it, the ball has to go in the hoop if you want to win.  I have never been a fan of walking the ball up the court and not utilizing the fast break.  I have never liked the Wisconsin teams of scoring in the 50s and making the game ugly even though they were wining. The NBA is all bombs away from 3 point land and has been that way for a long time.  The best teams have guys that can shoot. It’s not rocket science. I don’t know if Archie’s offense will look different with shooters. I didn’t follow him much at Dayton.  I just remember his teams always in a dog fight.  Hoping something changes soon. I’m not asking for a Crean offense consisting of several turnovers. I like teams that can spread the floor with shooters.  

Shooting was about the only thing about Crean that I would say I miss.  He had 4 years where we ranked top 5 in the country in 3 point percentage.  Maybe he could come back as an assistant and teach that...and nothing else haha.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Leathernecks said:

Nice work.
Looking at each, we missed 16(?), a few were on kickouts or where Juwan had position underneath.
Of those 16 missed, we rebounded 6 of them for a 37.5% offensive rebound percentage.
The only shots that looked out of place or not in the context of the offense were the deep late shot clock attempts,
or where it seemed McRoberts looked a little rushed in shooting.
Overall, despite the many misses, the shot resulted in higher PPP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some insightful thoughts and points in this thread, although I get the feeling that some are looking at this with a bit of contextual inaccuracy.

Bottom line is for a team to catch a familiar opponent, much less their own arch-rival off balance whether the ball is moving fast or not the guys off the ball have to be moving well or setting good enough screens(or both) to free team mates up iin timely fashion and ready to make the correct decision to convert the look.  Ability isnt always equal but when you see player 1 bring the ball up and the play being run for player 2 .

Players 3-5 have not looked prepared for the offense to progress to them as the play develops.When they were prepared they had often take  too long as to allow Purdue to settle in on the defensive end.

 They knew Romeo and Juwan were the  bail out options and stayed home for them.The announcers said verbatim during the broadcast that Purdue KNEW Indiana would often look to get Romeo the ball, and they didnt marry defenders to the assignment to the point where they disnt address Romeo .

So I obserbed that the next man for IU wasnt ready to respond to Purdue's focus. 

 The shot clock violation off the time out and inbound stuck out in particular as an example of lack of preparedness to convert .Indiana not only failed to get Purdue off balance, but they werent near ready to shoot   Purdue denied the pass to option 1,  and it ended up in the post where DeRon(was it?) had it trying to back his man down when the shotclock expried. The biggest questions IMO was why didnt anyone communicate this?!!! Why were players moving laterally and giving Purdue time to get into defensive position and why were guys who the play did NOT appear to be drawn up for look totally unprepared to make the play to the basket before Purdue recovered.

The offense otherwise got the desired look when the other factors fell into place but flat out failed to knock them down..Also , when Purdue scored on a 3 or dunk- which was a lot - guys seemed to be hanging on to the last play for too long and not moving on to getting Purdue immediately off balance again.That is my brief personal  observation. 

Maybe it is muscle memory bekng off,maybe it is conditioning, but this isn't a brand new offense at this stage and too many times guys dont appear ready . Again greatv houghts here but I feel like confidence is at the root.Chemistry hasnt settled on this group.If think our best ball could still be on the horizon, but it wont magically happen.It doesnt require changing the player.It requires a spur to the team and its collective sense of urgency. That can directly affect decisiveness as well.  There are ways to accomplsih this in coaching.However with individuals it neither exact nor guarantred.Having a certain coaches players just feels like a cop out excuse to me if there isnt a huge discrepancy in ability and IQ.  I still believe Archie and the players can figure it out but the time their OOC and early B1G record bought them is beginnjng to run out . They need to do much more amd immediately or any aspirations of contention for the regular seasin title likely go bye bye witbout wins starting this week. The BTT may become more critical to IUs NCAA-Toutlook than any of us would wish, if not.

I could have just said Archie's offense works.Guys are either not ready or just not executing .Confidence is likely at the root and renewed sense of urgency isnt bad as long as it doesn't become panic mode. Only the staff truly understands the dynamics in the lockerroom enough to figure out a workable way to pull it together, while running well behind schedule .All of this in a particularly brutal and unforgiving B1G. Had I put it This way it wouldn't have explained where my personal observations from the outside - came in-  very well.

If I'm incorrect or off base,then how many charges did Purdue draw, and what was IU's conversion rates after a Purdue 3 or dunk.I cant just blame the refs either although I noticed some inconsistency to put it lightly. To some degree tentative play is a measurable quality. The observer has to know the individual player's skillset, and apply the eye test objectively... using practice AND game film in a comparative manner.If they are practicing well, what discrepancy is taking pkace between the practice and game environment.It takes a fibe tooth comb so to speak.We heard gold jerseys and motivation but we saw disappointing results. 

Sometines it is less about the individual and who the collective may be emotionally feeding off of.Cough cough Romeo.Not to be insulted but cool calm collected body language can radiate outward in unintended ways. I dont see Romeo on the bech cheering.Same goes for others at times but look at who the guys get emotional cues from nonverbally and it gives one a different lens. This- from someone who has worked in a group home environment with non verbal individuals.- but applied through my lens into basketball as having played and coached at some competive organized level.and won.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, for comparison sake was Victor Oladipo, great penetrator average handle , sometimes suspect shot.Long body.Except totally different non-verbal cues.

Players around Victor fed off of what is in terms of "DNA" a very similar scorer to Langford.I just think players 2-__ feed off of Romeo's mellow presence differently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...