Jump to content

New approach/offense in 2020-21


Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Sark said:

Actually, his grade in school, along with his teammates, is what I’ve mentioned. None of those four have any college basketball experience. I’ve seen plenty of posts dismissing that fact, all in spite of how we see that lack of experience be a difference maker for most teams.

now you are talking about experience not age?  stand on your point.  lay out the averages and it's over.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 113
  • Created
  • Last Reply
34 minutes ago, Sark said:

I haven’t changed my standard here at all. Two seniors, a junior and a sophomore exit. Four freshmen, including one who really should even be a freshman, enter. In the “get older” mantra that Miller has discussed, this isn’t older. Not being critical of him for this, bit it’s factually the co position of the 20-21 team. Plenty of people don’t think experience matters and we’ve seen that in most of the posts here, but history tells a different story.

So, taking DA/JS out of the mix for a minute.....if 2 seniors leave, unless they are replaced with grad transfer seniors, we will get younger no matter what.  So for the sake of your argument, we replace those 2 seniors with grad transfer seniors.  That would give us 4?seniors this year.  Then so we dont get any younger we replace them with 4 grad transfer seniors next year?  Eventually we have an incomming class of 10-13 grad transfer seniors every year so we dont get any younger.

Im pretty sure CAM's comments about getting old and staying old were more along the lines of establishing a culture for our program and getting the right kind of kids to buy in because the things he does as a coach take time for kids to learn.  Its about keeping the program stable not getting the team to qualify for the NCAARP tournament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, 3Ballin said:

So, taking DA/JS out of the mix for a minute.....if 2 seniors leave, unless they are replaced with grad transfer seniors, we will get younger no matter what.  So for the sake of your argument, we replace those 2 seniors with grad transfer seniors.  That would give us 4?seniors this year.  Then so we dont get any younger we replace them with 4 grad transfer seniors next year?  Eventually we have an incomming class of 10-13 grad transfer seniors every year so we dont get any younger.

Im pretty sure CAM's comments about getting old and staying old were more along the lines of establishing a culture for our program and getting the right kind of kids to buy in because the things he does as a coach take time for kids to learn.  Its about keeping the program stable not getting the team to qualify for the NCAARP tournament.

I think you did a great job of exposing the flaws in Sark's twisted logic.

It is worth noting, for the umpteenth time, that we return more minutes and more scoring this year than what we did last year. That would leave any reasonable person to conclude we return more experience. 

Out of what I think we all expect our core rotation to be, you have a majority of guys who will be anywhere between their third and fifth year in a college program. We will have a five-star freshman we depend on to be a key rotation guy and maybe one more as a role player.  That is in no way a young or inexperienced team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Sark said:

I haven’t changed my standard here at all. Two seniors, a junior and a sophomore exit. Four freshmen, including one who really should even be a freshman, enter. In the “get older” mantra that Miller has discussed, this isn’t older. Not being critical of him for this, bit it’s factually the co position of the 20-21 team. Plenty of people don’t think experience matters and we’ve seen that in most of the posts here, but history tells a different story.

It's already been shown multiple times in this thread that while they are younger it's not much. Only a total of 2 years less of college experience from last season. This is negligible considering they're losing 6 years of experience in two players that didn't get much PT. They're also returning more PT than last year.

You keep harping getting old and staying old like there won't be any fluctuations. There will be and a difference of 2 years experience for the whole team from one season to the next isn't great, especially when the team has plenty of upperclassmen.

Since you seem to be saying that Miller isn't doing what he said he'd do, I disagree with you backed by these numbers. The returning players get older and more experienced which helps offset the loss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sark said:

I’m not criticizing Miller, but we aren’t getting older, as he wants us to do. 

The difference in "age"/experience from this season to last is only 2 years, so not much. Again, there will be fluctuations. Maybe this is around Miller's target "age." I haven't heard or seen Miller complaining that they're a young team. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Sark said:

From a literal standpoint, you would be correct. More practically, it’s about not turning over large chunks of the roster, subbing out seasoned and older players for younger, inexperienced ones.

We return 7 rotation players, including our best player. That's not turning over a large chunk of the roster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the extent we lost experience, it was with erratic players.  Regardless of chronological age, you come back with seniors in Brunk and Durham.  Race is in his 4th year.  Phinisee has started for the most part and is an upperclassman.  TJD may be a sophomore, but that’s outweighed by how productive he will be after playing huge minutes as a freshman.  Franklin played a lot for a freshman.  

You lose Green, who was all over the place with his play and didn’t provide stability you want.  Davis was limited.  Smith’s motor and skill set were lacking.  Good kid, but Anderson struggled.  

Justin Smith is a good athlete in some respects.  He has a good vertical and is fast end to end although we rarely got a glimpse of it.   But what limits him tremendously is that he obviously struggles laterally.  This is basketball where lateral agility is essential and he lacks it.  I assume he played four years in high school and now three years in college.   A kid who has played ball for this long and still can’t dribble, make passes on the move, or drive is obviously not good laterally.  That’s a huge limiting factor for what IU has around him.  Someone  that weak laterally can’t be considered a great athlete.  

The offense got clunky.  While I agree he’s a good defender at times, he’s not wired with a strong motor.  He missed a lot of killer close outs and didn’t play hard off and on.  He’s a bright kid and I would have liked him back.  It leaves us short on depth but if we stay healthy guys like Race, who plays much harder, can make up for him on the boards and defensively.   We will shoot better and stretch the floor better without him, leaving more space in the paint for others.  I am concerned about front court depth without him, but if we stay healthy, IMO we may have an addition by subtraction phenomenon here.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BobSaccamanno said:

A kid who has played ball for this long and still can’t dribble, make passes on the move, or drive is obviously not good laterally.  That’s a huge limiting factor for what IU has around him.  Someone  that weak laterally can’t be considered a great athlete

All that is very true and he never caught a pass on the move that he didn't have problems with. His hand/eye coordination wasn't the best...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Sark said:

A third of the roster is new. How do you define “large chunk”?

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but it stands to reason when you have 13 scholarships that if you have things balanced well between classes that is about what you can expect to lose in a given year. The only way to get old and stay old is to have that type of balance, not have seasons where you lose no one then seasons where over half of the roster turns over as we saw frequently with Crean. 

Having between 1/4 and 1/3 of the roster turn over every year is good, the problem is when it starts becoming 1/2 or more turning over. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Sark said:

Yeah, I realize that. One versus many, especially when this has been personalized by the many, isn’t going to foster any kind of meaningful discussion. 

It's hard to have meaningful discussion when you ignore facts and data. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of the "turnover" IU had, two (actually three) graduated and one that was out of the rotation.  Justin Smith is the only rotation player who left and as several have argued, it wouldn't shock me if the offense moves/shoots/executes better with him out of it.  It's pretty obvious that he and CAM did not agree on the role he would play in the upcoming season and at that point, it's best for everyone involved that he moves on.

As much as I like Damezi, it's obvious he wasn't satisfied with his progress so he too, is probably a better fit elsewhere.  If this is the kind of "turnover" IU experiences under CAM, I think they will be just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sark said:

I haven’t ignored it in the least. You’ve used other data in an effort to avoid the fact I originally stated . . . We’re getting younger. With that, there’s no need to continue with this.

This is what you originally stated... 

On 8/3/2020 at 11:01 AM, Sark said:

I know Miller wants us to “get older”, but we really just got younger, which means we took a big step back in experience. 

We return more minutes this year than we did last year. How are you defining experience? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but it stands to reason when you have 13 scholarships that if you have things balanced well between classes that is about what you can expect to lose in a given year. The only way to get old and stay old is to have that type of balance, not have seasons where you lose no one then seasons where over half of the roster turns over as we saw frequently with Crean. 

Having between 1/4 and 1/3 of the roster turn over every year is good, the problem is when it starts becoming 1/2 or more turning over. 

Stop using logic😀

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Sark said:

I haven’t changed my standard here at all. Two seniors, a junior and a sophomore exit. Four freshmen, including one who really should even be a freshman, enter. In the “get older” mantra that Miller has discussed, this isn’t older. Not being critical of him for this, bit it’s factually the co position of the 20-21 team. Plenty of people don’t think experience matters and we’ve seen that in most of the posts here, but history tells a different story.

You literally just argued with yourself.  

So if someone shows you the averages of experience from last year's team to this year's team you will walk away or will you flip back to age?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, NotIThatLives said:

You literally just argued with yourself.  

So if someone shows you the averages of experience from last year's team to this year's team you will walk away or will you flip back to age?

@IUFLA did show averages. He and I both also showed the team total years of experience for the team and both of us came up with this team team has 2 years less of experience total. Which isn't much, especially since this team is returning more mpg played and the expected contributors have an increased experience level compared to last year. Sark had ignored these posts, of course, since he's just here to argue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

@IUFLA did show averages. He and I both also showed the team total years of experience for the team and both of us came up with this team team has 2 years less of experience total. Which isn't much, especially since this team is returning more mpg played and the expected contributors have an increased experience level compared to last year. Sark had ignored these posts, of course, since he's just here to argue.

I saw your all's averages which were way different than what was computer generated by the stat website that I posted yesterday. 20 - 21 has not been published yet

Screenshot_20200804-090312.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, NotIThatLives said:

I saw your all's averages which were way different than what was computer generated by the stat website that I posted yesterday. 20 - 21 has not been published yet

Screenshot_20200804-090312.png

Those averages include everyone on the roster, including walk-ons. IUFLA and I only included scholarship players.

It looks like this also does not count redshirt seasons, which we did. Except I didn't count Hunter's redshirt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Sark said:

So, you’re admitting we got younger, just not much younger? You’re admitting I was correct,. Thanks.

I haven't said we didn't get younger. The point of yours which I was disputing was that we "took a big step back in experience."  A mere 2 years of total team experience isn't that, it's negligible. Especially since some of the experience of "age" that we're losing includes Anderson and Davis who didn't play much the last 2 seasons. Thus the team is actually returning more minutes played per game than the season before. So, no, there wasn't "a big step back in experience." Which has been my point the whole time but you're so fixated on proving the one aspect you got right to be correct that you completely ignored the one you got way wrong. But that's typical for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sark said:

It’s also about preparing and practicing. Ask a coach what that’s like when you turn over a third of your team. It impacts your preparation, which those of us who played sports know well and those who didn’t never consider. And I understand your point, which was made because so many people wanted to deny that what I’ve been saying is correct. But I get why that’s been happening.

Ah, so now it's not age or experience but simply roster turnover regardless of the returning experience. Way to shift the goalposts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, NY hoosier said:

Don’t want to be part of the problem, rather the solution, but Why do you guys argue this stuff? Boredom? Passion?? Just interested, and I know I don’t have read it, but it’s like a car wreck!

If you put Snark on ignore, you get to skip about half the posts!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...