'21-'22 National Hoops Scene

[go_iu_bb]

5 minutes ago, rico said:

It all comes down to execution, freshman mistakes or not.

Right. So the only blame is on the players and the coaching staff bears none of it?

It's the coach's job to recruit players that can execute at the this level and then to prepare them to do so. Miller is failing at least one of these aspects. 

Maybe Coach K and Cal failed at the recruiting part for this year as the players obviously aren't the immediate impact players they need to be for those teams to be successful this season. But do you really believe that if those players stay for another season or two that both of those teams would continue to be bad? No. Coaching and experience would make them tough to beat. 

[rico]

2 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

Right. So the only blame is on the players and the coaching staff bears none of it?

It's the coach's job to recruit players that can execute at the this level and then to prepare them to do so. Miller is failing at least one of these aspects. 

Maybe Coach K and Cal failed at the recruiting part for this year as the players obviously aren't the immediate impact players they need to be for those teams to be successful this season. But do you really believe that if those players stay for another season or two that both of those teams would continue to be bad? No. Coaching and experience would make them tough to beat. 

Hold on there.  UK and Duke have numerous players projected to go in the 1st round.  What does that say about their struggles?

[go_iu_bb]

17 minutes ago, rico said:

Hold on there.  UK and Duke have numerous players projected to go in the 1st round.  What does that say about their struggles?

It says that those freshmen aren't the immediate impact needed to win consistently their first (only) year in college. They lack experience and make freshman mistakes. There could also be chemistry and selfishness issues.

This is a one off season for those teams. It's SOP for IU. That's the point. If it was one game or maybe even just one season then it could be shrugged off as "the players just didn't execute." But it's been consistent under Miller. At some point it has to be either the players aren't talented enough to execute or they aren't coached well enough to prepare them to execute. Possibly both. Yet people say that it's not a talent issue nor a coaching issue so I'd like to know what they think is causing the players to fail to execute so often is.

[BGleas]

6 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

It says that those freshmen aren't the immediate impact needed to win consistently their first (only) year in college. They lack experience and make freshman mistakes. There could also be chemistry and selfishness issues.

This is a one off season for those teams. It's SOP for IU. That's the point. If it was one game or maybe even just one season then it could be shrugged off as "the players just didn't execute." But it's been consistent under Miller. At some point it has to be either the players aren't talented enough to execute or they aren't coached well enough to prepare them to execute. Possibly both. Yet people say that it's not a talent issue nor a coaching issue so I'd like to know what they think is causing the players to fail to execute so often is.

Who are these 'people? This board is littered with countless threads and posts ripping the coach, calling for his firing, as well as posts talking about how lowly ranked IU's backcourt is, how we don't have enough bigs, how our starting guards are bench players on any good team, etc., etc. 

[Cutter]

7 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Who are these 'people? This board is littered with countless threads and posts ripping the coach, calling for his firing, as well as posts talking about how lowly ranked IU's backcourt is, how we don't have enough bigs, how our starting guards are bench players on any good team, etc., etc. 

people just like you with a different opinion 

[go_iu_bb]

34 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Who are these 'people? This board is littered with countless threads and posts ripping the coach, calling for his firing, as well as posts talking about how lowly ranked IU's backcourt is, how we don't have enough bigs, how our starting guards are bench players on any good team, etc., etc. 

Yes, there are plenty of those threads. Notice that I didn't say "everyone." In these threads are the same people defending both coaching and recruiting (i.e. talent level), saying they're both fine. Then when specific incidents are brought up, these same posters then say it was just that the players didn't execute. It's like a broken record.

[KoB2011]

12 hours ago, IU Scott said:

W. Virginia bear TT 88-87 on a shot with 6 seconds to go.  TT was up 12 with 10 minutes to go but couldn't hold it.

I know a lot of people criticized Archie for not extending the game by fouling with 45 seconds to go.  W. Virginia hit a shot to cut it to 1 with 49 seconds left and Huggins played it out and did not foul.  TT missed a 3 and then WVU hit the shot to win the game.

There is a big difference in a 1 point game and a 3 point game. 

[KoB2011]

5 hours ago, BGleas said:

I don't disagree with those saying that extending the game against Rutgers could have been the way to go, but at the same time what Archie did worked. 

IU stopped Rutgers on the possession, the problem is the players didn't execute and allowed Rutgers to get the offensive rebound. Race, our 2nd best rebounder didn't get position to box out and our wing on that side didn't help him by pinching on Johnson. 

The plan worked, the players didn't execute. 

It would have taken perfect execution on three things for the plan to work; defense, then rebounding, then hitting a three when they knew we needed it. With the way the team was playing that day, I just think that' asking a lot. 

[Billingsley99]

10 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

There is a big difference in a 1 point game and a 3 point game. 

Exactly. The plan CAM put into play if executed perfectly would still need IU to hit a 3 to tie it. Winning was taken off the table. 

[Billingsley99]

11 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

It would have taken perfect execution on three things for the plan to work; defense, then rebounding, then hitting a three when they knew we needed it. With the way the team was playing that day, I just think that' asking a lot. 

Beat me to it. What you said.

[IU Scott]

18 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

There is a big difference in a 1 point game and a 3 point game. 

IF TT hit their 3 it would have put them up 4 with 19 to go so it would have been a two possession game.

[13th&Jackson]

I just don’t think intentionally fouling to make a one possession game into a likely two possession game, especially with the double bonus makes sense. Rutgers is a poor FT team, but they were making them Sunday

[Billingsley99]

32 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

IF TT hit their 3 it would have put them up 4 with 19 to go so it would have been a two possession game.

If Rutgers hit there shot its a 5 point game with under 15. 

[Billingsley99]

15 minutes ago, 13th&Jackson said:

I just don’t think intentionally fouling to make a one possession game into a likely two possession game, especially with the double bonus makes sense. Rutgers is a poor FT team, but they were making them Sunday

You have to play the percentages to give yourself a chance extending the game gives you the best and mostly path to victory

[IU Scott]

25 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

If Rutgers hit there shot its a 5 point game with under 15. 

Well I was told no coach would do what Archie did but a HOF coach made the same decision last night.  The only difference is that one worked and the other didn't.  In both cases if the other team hits their shot the game is pretty much over.  We played great defense and forced a bad shot but did not get the rebound.

[NCHoosier32]

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

Well I was told no coach would do what Archie did but a HOF coach made the same decision last night.  The only difference is that one worked and the other didn't.  In both cases if the other team hits their shot the game is pretty much over.  We played great defense and forced a bad shot but did not get the rebound.

Kind of like when a coach is deciding whether to call a timeout on the last possession to win the game or let it play out.  If whatever you do works, all is good.  If it doesn't, everyone will criticize it.  I personally think both of these situations depends on your team and who you are playing.  

[IU Scott]

2 minutes ago, NCHoosier32 said:

Kind of like when a coach is deciding whether to call a timeout on the last possession to win the game or let it play out.  If whatever you do works, all is good.  If it doesn't, everyone will criticize it.  I personally think both of these situations depends on your team and who you are playing.  

I know Rutgers doesn't shoot free throws well but some of that has to do with Johnson and his real poor shooting.  The others who were on the court shoots descent and they were making them during this game.  I remember when Johnson got the ball I wanted them to foul him but he got rid of the ball quickly.

I remember so many times the announcers especially Dick Vitale telling RMK to call a TO at the end of the game but he usually never called that TO

Edited January 26, 2021 by IU Scott

[Billingsley99]

3 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Well I was told no coach would do what Archie did but a HOF coach made the same decision last night.  The only difference is that one worked and the other didn't.  In both cases if the other team hits their shot the game is pretty much over.  We played great defense and forced a bad shot but did not get the rebound.

It was a 1 point game right,? IU game was 3 little bit different 

Even if we got rebound we needed a 3 to tie. Why would we foul and make it a 2 possession game with 8 seconds if we wouldn't with 41 seconds?????

[Billingsley99]

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

I know Rutgers doesn't shoot free throws well but some of that has to do with Johnson and his real poor shooting.  The others who were on the court shoots descent and they were making them during this game.  I remember when Johnson got the ball I wanted them to foul him but he got rid of the ball quickly.

I remember so many times the announcers especially Dick Vitale telling RMK to call a TO at the end of the game but he usually never called that TO

RMK trust his players to make right decisions 

[IU Scott]

Just now, Billingsley99 said:

It was a 1 point game right,? IU game was 3 little bit different 

Even if we got rebound we needed a 3 to tie. Why would we foul and make it a 2 possession game with 8 seconds if we wouldn't with 41 seconds?????

Well TT shot a 3 up 1 and if it went in that would have put them up two possessions with 18 seconds to go.  

[Billingsley99]

Just now, IU Scott said:

Well TT shot a 3 up 1 and if it went in that would have put them up two possessions with 18 seconds to go.  

Right you are making my point.  If it has a chance to be a 2 possession game you need to do it sooner rather than later.

[IU Scott]

2 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

RMK trust his players to make right decisions 

He sure did and I always thought it was better to not call the TO.  It gives the other team a chance to set up their defense so I rather just go and play it out.

[Billingsley99]

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

He sure did and I always thought it was better to not call the TO.  It gives the other team a chance to set up their defense so I rather just go and play it out.

Exactly.  You are correct with a young team maybe call time out but if you trust your teams to make right decisions then go in transition and make the defense adjust to you

[IU Scott]

1 minute ago, Billingsley99 said:

Right you are making my point.  If it has a chance to be a 2 possession game you need to do it sooner rather than later.

When Rutgers shot the ball there were 15 seconds to go and if we got the rebound we would had the chance to tie it.  So how is that different than WV playing it out and TT shooting with 18 seconds to go.  In either case if the shot goes in then the other team has little chance to win.  I am not saying that I agree with the decision just stating that Archie gets blasted for it but a HOF coach made the same decision.

[BGleas]

1 hour ago, KoB2011 said:

It would have taken perfect execution on three things for the plan to work; defense, then rebounding, then hitting a three when they knew we needed it. With the way the team was playing that day, I just think that' asking a lot. 

The other way required a lot of things to work as well.