Jump to content

Exposing Archie's outdated offensive ideology.


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 157
  • Created
  • Last Reply
5 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I guess I don't think shooting 20 3's a game is shooting them all the time

But 30 is?  Why not just shoot 10.....and the rest of the points come from mid-range.  How about shoot none...and all the points come from the 2?  That is the way you want it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, IU Scott said:

I am not saying total FG % but form the mid range and 55% might be a little high but to me it is as efficient as shooting any other shot.  Especially in college and with the 30 second shot clock I think just shooting 3's or trying to drive for a layup is a terrible way of playing your offense.  When you drive to the basket you are bringing 2 to 3 defenders and a contested layup is not even a good shot.  I think if you are being guarded at the 3 all you need to do is up fake and go in for that easy 15 foot jumper instead of doing a step back 3.  I m just not into the analytics because it is taking a great part of the game away from basketball. With the 30 second clock if you can't get open with your first offensive set you are going to have to get your best player the ball on the top of the key and expect him to make a play.  Most of the time all you get is a contested shot at the end of the shot clock.

Hulls was money on that shot fake dribble pull up.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's pretty simple. We don't take enough and he doesn't recruit a roster that's built around shooting. Check his A10 stats. They're always near the bottom in attempts. Check his FT % they're always shooting poorly. Check his teams assists rankings, very mediocre. Check his teams TO's, always very high. A 3 point shot is worth more for nearly every team in the country. Even for this roster.

Look at purdue's conference shooting 1st in attempts and 1st in %. Michigan is second in attempts. 1/2. MSU shot 40% and won last year. I've explained UM's system and they won the year before. That's the game today. 

Why did Newkirk's shooting plummet? Why did Devonte's? Why has Fitzner been ruined? Why have Rob and Devonte shot more 2's than 3's when they have terrible short game / midgames? They're in the 30's but valuable 3 point shooters. 36/38. Why does Romeo who has a solid stroke shooting in the 20's? Why is Damezi in the 20's? 

There isn't a shooter coming in the class either. Aarman shoots around 38 in HS which won't transition as highly in college. 

The type of player he recruits is the tough nosed type of player and not skill based. It's why his system shoots poorly from the line and it's why his teams always TO high and assist average at best. You can cherry pick games where we shot and hit a lot of 3's but all your doing is ignoring the totality and general approach of the system and looking at outliers. 

The games played on the court and not on spread sheets but you simply can't ignore the math that 1.05-1.07 points won't cut it at all in todays game. In the A-10 he can develop players and out coach A-10 coaches better than they could but he's playing in the big 10 where every roster has players that can bail the offense out late in the clock with 3's. When you score poorly and face the talent / coaching that's in the BIG 10 it's no surprise at all that he's 13-18 in conference play. We're losing Morgan / Romeo and maybe devonte and/or smith. Anderson is nowhere near ready to contribute. Jake isn't either. Trayce doesn't = Morgan and Hunter won't = Romeo. It's just poor all around. I don't even care anymore because the program is garbage. Give him 5, 6, 7 years but I'm telling you the system is bogus. If he could recruit like Cal or Coach K where his teams are just levels and levels ahead physically and athletically then sure this system would work but he won't. I'm assuming that Sean runs the same type of stuff at Arizona and he's the better recruiter. How many FF's? 0. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, ADegenerate said:

It's pretty simple. We don't take enough and he doesn't recruit a roster that's built around shooting. Check his A10 stats. They're always near the bottom in attempts. Check his FT % they're always shooting poorly. Check his teams assists rankings, very mediocre. Check his teams TO's, always very high. A 3 point shot is worth more for nearly every team in the country. Even for this roster.

Look at purdue's conference shooting 1st in attempts and 1st in %. Michigan is second in attempts. 1/2. MSU shot 40% and won last year. I've explained UM's system and they won the year before. That's the game today. 

Why did Newkirk's shooting plummet? Why did Devonte's? Why has Fitzner been ruined? Why have Rob and Devonte shot more 2's than 3's when they have terrible short game / midgames? They're in the 30's but valuable 3 point shooters. 36/38. Why does Romeo who has a solid stroke shooting in the 20's? Why is Damezi in the 20's? 

There isn't a shooter coming in the class either. Aarman shoots around 38 in HS which won't transition as highly in college. 

The type of player he recruits is the tough nosed type of player and not skill based. It's why his system shoots poorly from the line and it's why his teams always TO high and assist average at best. You can cherry pick games where we shot and hit a lot of 3's but all your doing is ignoring the totality and general approach of the system and looking at outliers. 

The games played on the court and not on spread sheets but you simply can't ignore the math that 1.05-1.07 points won't cut it at all in todays game. In the A-10 he can develop players and out coach A-10 coaches better than they could but he's playing in the big 10 where every roster has players that can bail the offense out late in the clock with 3's. When you score poorly and face the talent / coaching that's in the BIG 10 it's no surprise at all that he's 13-18 in conference play. We're losing Morgan / Romeo and maybe devonte and/or smith. Anderson is nowhere near ready to contribute. Jake isn't either. Trayce doesn't = Morgan and Hunter won't = Romeo. It's just poor all around. I don't even care anymore because the program is garbage. Give him 5, 6, 7 years but I'm telling you the system is bogus. If he could recruit like Cal or Coach K where his teams are just levels and levels ahead physically and athletically then sure this system would work but he won't. I'm assuming that Sean runs the same type of stuff at Arizona and he's the better recruiter. How many FF's? 0. 

 

Damn that was depressing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How did we rank 9th / 10th in conference in TO's the last two seasons with such a slow tempo game? If the offense is based around getting good open looks then why are we ranked 6th/13th in assists? 11th and 13th in scoring. 

Evan / Devonte are 40% three point shooters. Morgan's a hyper effect 36 for a big. Al is a 40% shooter. Rob 36%. There's enough shooting on the roster to be at least average but we're dead last shooting 29%. That's not a roster problem that's a coaching problem. 

We're not even an effective two pt shooting team. 

Whatever though. I've just outlined to you guys what the problems are with hard data so it's all on the coach here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bowhunter said:

Damn that was depressing!

I mean there's huge potential here if he'll adapt and adjust because you can see that he can handle the recruiting well enough. He's young and he has the pedigree but he's got to evolve here. I really hope he does change but I highly doubt he completely revamps his approach. 

There's still the option that he somehow develops a super defense team, we're hyper effective with our 3 point shooting, and we're somehow in the 53-56 range on twos...that's the dream scenario for his system I suppose. What should scare everyone if they aren't buying into the shooting problem I've laid out is the poor Assists / To problems. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, ADegenerate said:

It's pretty simple. We don't take enough and he doesn't recruit a roster that's built around shooting. Check his A10 stats. They're always near the bottom in attempts. Check his FT % they're always shooting poorly. Check his teams assists rankings, very mediocre. Check his teams TO's, always very high. A 3 point shot is worth more for nearly every team in the country. Even for this roster.

Look at purdue's conference shooting 1st in attempts and 1st in %. Michigan is second in attempts. 1/2. MSU shot 40% and won last year. I've explained UM's system and they won the year before. That's the game today. 

Why did Newkirk's shooting plummet? Why did Devonte's? Why has Fitzner been ruined? Why have Rob and Devonte shot more 2's than 3's when they have terrible short game / midgames? They're in the 30's but valuable 3 point shooters. 36/38. Why does Romeo who has a solid stroke shooting in the 20's? Why is Damezi in the 20's? 

There isn't a shooter coming in the class either. Aarman shoots around 38 in HS which won't transition as highly in college. 

The type of player he recruits is the tough nosed type of player and not skill based. It's why his system shoots poorly from the line and it's why his teams always TO high and assist average at best. You can cherry pick games where we shot and hit a lot of 3's but all your doing is ignoring the totality and general approach of the system and looking at outliers. 

The games played on the court and not on spread sheets but you simply can't ignore the math that 1.05-1.07 points won't cut it at all in todays game. In the A-10 he can develop players and out coach A-10 coaches better than they could but he's playing in the big 10 where every roster has players that can bail the offense out late in the clock with 3's. When you score poorly and face the talent / coaching that's in the BIG 10 it's no surprise at all that he's 13-18 in conference play. We're losing Morgan / Romeo and maybe devonte and/or smith. Anderson is nowhere near ready to contribute. Jake isn't either. Trayce doesn't = Morgan and Hunter won't = Romeo. It's just poor all around. I don't even care anymore because the program is garbage. Give him 5, 6, 7 years but I'm telling you the system is bogus. If he could recruit like Cal or Coach K where his teams are just levels and levels ahead physically and athletically then sure this system would work but he won't. I'm assuming that Sean runs the same type of stuff at Arizona and he's the better recruiter. How many FF's? 0. 

 

Thanks for researching, definitely makes me go hmm. The one thing that I do think other posters have correctly pointed out is we do seem to get consistently good looks from 3 in Archie's system this year. Maybe it's now become the result of other teams sagging and clogging the lane daring us to hit. However, I wonder if Archie just does the small recruiting tweak and finds a couple dead eye shooters. Maybe that is all that is needed for success in the system? 

Also, even more curious this year to see I Virginia flames out again in the tourney. Something tells me they won't this year, we'll see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ArchieBall13 said:

Thanks for researching, definitely makes me go hmm. The one thing that I do think other posters have correctly pointed out is we do seem to get consistently good looks from 3 in Archie's system this year. Maybe it's now become the result of other teams sagging and clogging the lane daring us to hit. However, I wonder if Archie just does the small recruiting tweak and finds a couple dead eye shooters. Maybe that is all that is needed for success in the system? 

Also, even more curious this year to see I Virginia flames out again in the tourney. Something tells me they won't this year, we'll see.

They aren't free to let it fly and we never get transition 3 point shots. It's all three point shots late in the offense once we can't get the ball inside. It's the only reason that I can come up with for the regression of all shooters under archie like Newkirk, Devonte, and Fitzner. 

As far as Virginia goes...they'll flame out again. I've posted why their system is bogus too but the glaring problem for them that they don't assist the ball well. You can win playing a hyper slow tempo like UM or Nova but you have to shoot volume threes and most importantly assist. They don't do it well. They'll get upset early or get slapped around by an atheletic team in the later rounds.

Alright guys. I've got Pharma exams so enough procrastination on my part. 

I'm not even trying to be negative or start an archie out trend, it's just glaring some of the issues that should be spotlighted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ADegenerate said:

It's pretty simple. We don't take enough and he doesn't recruit a roster that's built around shooting.

The type of player he recruits is the tough nosed type of player and not skill based.

I think it's pretty clear he's recruiting a significantly different level and type of player at IU as compared to his tenure at Dayton and that's where you've missed the point as far as I'm concerned.  That makes the rest of your analysis suspect for me so I'll simply advise you to R-E-L-A-X and give this coach a cycle to either prove or disprove your theory.  Hell, we aren't even halfway through a cycle and it's the first half even.  Our second best recruit in the Archie era never hit the court in a game this year.

I'll admit I get a little pissed when I read nothing but doom & gloom from you and a couple of other posters here.  Seriously...what's the agenda?  The best coach IU ever had completely and categorically disagrees with your analysis, so why don't you at least give Archie the four years he deserves?  

Personally, when I was in a negative mood like you appear to be, I just stayed away.  It's fine to offer criticism, but I fail to see the value of being so relentlessly negative.  You need a few beers, brother...:cheers:

Well, unless you're an angry drunk.  If you are, scratch that suggestion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

I think it's pretty clear he's recruiting a significantly different level and type of player at IU as compared to his tenure at Dayton and that's where you've missed the point as far as I'm concerned.  That makes the rest of your analysis suspect for me so I'll simply advise you to R-E-L-A-X and give this coach a cycle to either prove or disprove your theory.  Hell, we aren't even halfway through a cycle and it's the first half even.  Our second best recruit in the Archie era never hit the court in a game this year.

I'll admit I get a little pissed when I read nothing but doom & gloom from you and a couple of other posters here.  Seriously...what's the agenda?  The best coach IU ever had completely and categorically disagrees with your analysis, so why don't you at least give Archie the four years he deserves?  

Personally, when I was in a negative mood like you appear to be, I just stayed away.  It's fine to offer criticism, but I fail to see the value of being so relentlessly negative.  You need a few beers, brother...:cheers:

Well, unless you're an angry drunk.  If you are, scratch that suggestion.

What point have I missed? My analysis is more than number crunching. I am relaxed by the way. I'm just pointing out things that I'm confident that I know what I'm talking about. I couldn't even finish last season and I'm sure you've seen posters talk about they're done watching this season. I'm more of a neutral personality rather than a pessimistic or optimistic person. The recruiting is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the problems at hand. MSU, UM, and OSU will recruit just as well. Purdue is a top 30 recruiting school as well. 

My agenda is that I want IU to be successful and if they aren't going to be successful then at least entertain and play fun basketball. I can live with a slow pace. I can handle trying to be a defensive oriented team but what's unacceptable is being archaic and playing abysmal basketball on the offensive side. 

Why do I have to sit back be quiet and why does he need 4 plus years to figure it out? A large part of my posts have centered around the fact that his Dayton system had the same TO problems, low FT percentages, refusal to shoot 3's, and didn't assist the ball. 

If I wanted to relentlessly negative I'd have been posting all season. You can scream give it time all you want but the fact is the roster is decent and has been utilized poorly. 

I wish I could tip a few back but it's not possible with all these medical classes. 

He will get the time anyway so you don't have to worry about that. I just completely disagree with his approach. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ADegenerate said:

What point have I missed? My analysis is more than number crunching. I am relaxed by the way. I'm just pointing out things that I'm confident that I know what I'm talking about. I couldn't even finish last season and I'm sure you've seen posters talk about they're done watching this season. I'm more of a neutral personality rather than a pessimistic or optimistic person. The recruiting is irrelevant and has nothing to do with the problems at hand. MSU, UM, and OSU will recruit just as well. Purdue is a top 30 recruiting school as well. 

My agenda is that I want IU to be successful and if they aren't going to be successful then at least entertain and play fun basketball. I can live with a slow pace. I can handle trying to be a defensive oriented team but what's unacceptable is being archaic and playing abysmal basketball on the offensive side. 

Why do I have to sit back be quiet and why does he need 4 plus years to figure it out? A large part of my posts have centered around the fact that his Dayton system had the same TO problems, low FT percentages, refusal to shoot 3's, and didn't assist the ball. 

If I wanted to relentlessly negative I'd have been posting all season. You can scream give it time all you want but the fact is the roster is decent and has been utilized poorly. 

I wish I could tip a few back but it's not possible with all these medical classes. 

He will get the time anyway so you don't have to worry about that. I just completely disagree with his approach. 

...and I completely disagree with your take.  Turnovers are not the problem.  Putting the ball in the hole is the problem.  Romeo has come around in that regard, but most of the team still can't shoot.  Add to that the fact that Archie focused last season and early this season on teaching the pack line defense.  Admittedly, they didn't focus much on offense until he felt they had a reasonable grasp of his defense.  Only then did he really start teaching on the offensive side of the ball, so admittedly, that side of the equation is behind at this point because Archie felt the other side was most important to learn first.  Sure, this roster is decent.  I'd argue it's more than that.  Do you know how many aggregated games have been missed due to injury and suspension?  I count a grand total of three players who have appeared in all 24 games, although you could also argue that Juwan effectively missed the MSU game.  So far, IU has the following games missed: Jerome Hunter (24), Race Thompson (23), Zach McRoberts (8), Devonte Green (7), De'Ron Davis (5), Rob Phinisee (3), Al Durham (1) and Jake Forrester (can't remember how many).  That's the equivalent of missing 3+ rotation players for the entire season.  That hurts both in practice and games and I think it's unfair as hell to pass judgement on a product missing so many parts.

Again, look at the Michigan State game and tell me how Archie's archaic, abysmal offensive system managed to beat a top ten team on their own home court?  The answer is simple and it's not that Archie changed his offensive system for one game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, rico said:

But 30 is?  Why not just shoot 10.....and the rest of the points come from mid-range.  How about shoot none...and all the points come from the 2?  That is the way you want it.  

No it isn't because I sad numerous times that you need to be able to score from all 3 levels layups, mid range and 3 pointers.  My point on this topic is that analytics has totally taken the mid range game away and I think that is bad for basketball.  I am not saying I want 50 out of the 60 shots we take being mid range but I would like to see it utilized in the game today and have a better balanced offense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

No it isn't because I sad numerous times that you need to be able to score from all 3 levels layups, mid range and 3 pointers

I asked earlier, what is the acceptable breakdown in scoring at all 3 levels?  What is the breakdown per tier?  Obviously, you want to be better than 1 point per possession, but do you shoot 1/3rd from deep, another 1/3rd from mid range, another 1/3rd at the rim?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ADegenerate said:

I mean there's huge potential here if he'll adapt and adjust because you can see that he can handle the recruiting well enough. He's young and he has the pedigree but he's got to evolve here. I really hope he does change but I highly doubt he completely revamps his approach. 

There's still the option that he somehow develops a super defense team, we're hyper effective with our 3 point shooting, and we're somehow in the 53-56 range on twos...that's the dream scenario for his system I suppose. What should scare everyone if they aren't buying into the shooting problem I've laid out is the poor Assists / To problems. 

 

You make some great points . I think it just hurts to hear the truth sometimes. I’m definitely concerned, but my heart hopes your wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, PoHoosier said:

I asked earlier, what is the acceptable breakdown in scoring at all 3 levels?  What is the breakdown per tier?  Obviously, you want to be better than 1 point per possession, but do you shoot 1/3rd from deep, another 1/3rd from mid range, another 1/3rd at the rim?

Actually I would rather see teams shoot less of those driving layups in traffic that has no chance of going in.  I would like it to be really balance where you score your points from all over the court including free throws.  When RMK was successful his teams got to to line over 30 times a games and hit more free throws than the opponent even shot. I like to see this team be aggressive and go inside to the bigs more to get to the foul line. If you are successful at that then it will open it up for the perimeter players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know Michigan lost last night and I say this all the time, but their offense/defense is the perfect balance for me. I love how they spread the floor. That is a system I could get down with. Yes you may lose a game here or there when you aren’t hitting 3s, but their team is always built for March. Ultimately that’s the goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, ADegenerate said:

It's pretty simple. We don't take enough and he doesn't recruit a roster that's built around shooting. Check his A10 stats. They're always near the bottom in attempts. Check his FT % they're always shooting poorly. Check his teams assists rankings, very mediocre. Check his teams TO's, always very high. A 3 point shot is worth more for nearly every team in the country. Even for this roster.

Look at purdue's conference shooting 1st in attempts and 1st in %. Michigan is second in attempts. 1/2. MSU shot 40% and won last year. I've explained UM's system and they won the year before. That's the game today. 

Why did Newkirk's shooting plummet? Why did Devonte's? Why has Fitzner been ruined? Why have Rob and Devonte shot more 2's than 3's when they have terrible short game / midgames? They're in the 30's but valuable 3 point shooters. 36/38. Why does Romeo who has a solid stroke shooting in the 20's? Why is Damezi in the 20's? 

There isn't a shooter coming in the class either. Aarman shoots around 38 in HS which won't transition as highly in college. 

The type of player he recruits is the tough nosed type of player and not skill based. It's why his system shoots poorly from the line and it's why his teams always TO high and assist average at best. You can cherry pick games where we shot and hit a lot of 3's but all your doing is ignoring the totality and general approach of the system and looking at outliers. 

The games played on the court and not on spread sheets but you simply can't ignore the math that 1.05-1.07 points won't cut it at all in todays game. In the A-10 he can develop players and out coach A-10 coaches better than they could but he's playing in the big 10 where every roster has players that can bail the offense out late in the clock with 3's. When you score poorly and face the talent / coaching that's in the BIG 10 it's no surprise at all that he's 13-18 in conference play. We're losing Morgan / Romeo and maybe devonte and/or smith. Anderson is nowhere near ready to contribute. Jake isn't either. Trayce doesn't = Morgan and Hunter won't = Romeo. It's just poor all around. I don't even care anymore because the program is garbage. Give him 5, 6, 7 years but I'm telling you the system is bogus. If he could recruit like Cal or Coach K where his teams are just levels and levels ahead physically and athletically then sure this system would work but he won't. I'm assuming that Sean runs the same type of stuff at Arizona and he's the better recruiter. How many FF's? 0. 

 

So, Romeo isn't skilled based? You want to try that line on TDJ or KBJ? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be a really great team you have got to score from all levels. The amount of pressure you can put on a defense by score at all levels would be crazy. One level can feed off the other. I hate watching these guys drive in and throw up crazy shots at the rim that have about 15 % chance of going in. That only shows up in shooting % it should show up as a turnover. The three point line has ruin the mid range shot. Watch high school kids warm up most are shooting threes. Watch a game and just pay attention to how many times a player is open at 8 to 10 ft but will drive to the basket and take a crap shot or get it blocked. Larry Bird was a great shooter. He was amazing at shooting that fall away 8 to 10 footer. One other thing that you don’t see anymore is no one follows there shot anymore. You would think that a person who shoots 30% would follow their shot instead of holding there form like oh that’s good! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Steubenhoosier said:

So, Romeo isn't skilled based? You want to try that line on TDJ or KBJ? 

 

That's obviously an outlier. Did KBJ commit and I missed it? 

Anyway, thanks for letting me vent in between study sessions yall. I smashed my AP2 lab practical for a 97/100 so I'm buzzing. 

For the record @FKIM01 I'm not a relentlessly pessimistic person. I'm just eccentric, passionate, and detail oriented! If something isn't working I'll hunt for the answers why. 

Anyway, I've exhausted my POV in this thread. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...