Maryland Post-Game Thread

[NCHoosier32]

42 minutes ago, HoosierDom said:

I have to assume that Archie let him know, before he early enrolled, that this was likely. I also have to assume he doesn't look great in practice, because it seems to me that he should be getting more time. 

this is exactly what i said awhile back.  i definitely think you're right and don't see a transfer.  attitude does seem good from body language as well.  i'm just surprised that it is this little of PT.  oh well.  

[IowaHoosierFan]

2 hours ago, IUFLA said:

And on this team, that makes him a viable offensive option. You take him and Armaan away and this team shoots a whopping 27% (36-131) from 3 point land...

You mean if you take AF away.  Hunter really hasn't shot enough to have to a huge impact on the overall shooting percentage.  He is 9 of 26, Franklin is 20 of 42.

With all players We are 65 of 199 = .327
Without Hunter we are 56 of 173 = .324
Without Franklin we are 45 of 157 = .287
Without Both we are 36 of 131 = .275

So lets be honest.  Hunter isn't hurting or helping our shooting percentage.  Its Franklin.  Without him we lose 4 percent, we're in real trouble when he isn't on the floor

 

[NCHoosier32]

28 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

I've seen other write this and need a clarification. I do not see why he should be getting more time based strictly off his play in games. If he didn't have 5 stars next to his name would we even be talking about this? Should he be given more time based on our perceived idea of his potential, or based off of his play? 

Maybe I've missed some stuff, but it seems like right now he's a liability. The mistakes are glaring. I'm no Coach Tony and don't dissect game tape, so when multiple mistakes are obvious to the layman (layfan?), something is not right. What am I missing other than mini glimpses of athleticism? 

Not trying to be a d***, I'm seriously asking what others are seeing.....because I'm an admitted layfan. haha. 

Also, want to clarify that I'm a big KL fan and think he has a bright future. Please don't misread my criticism as 'trashing'.

again agree with this.  he does not look like he deserves it.  i wish it would be a little more, but CAM needs to try to win games.  

[IowaHoosierFan]

31 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

I've seen other write this and need a clarification. I do not see why he should be getting more time based strictly off his play in games. If he didn't have 5 stars next to his name would we even be talking about this? Should he be given more time based on our perceived idea of his potential, or based off of his play? 

Maybe I've missed some stuff, but it seems like right now he's a liability. The mistakes are glaring. I'm no Coach Tony and don't dissect game tape, so when multiple mistakes are obvious to the layman (layfan?), something is not right. What am I missing other than mini glimpses of athleticism? 

Not trying to be a d***, I'm seriously asking what others are seeing.....because I'm an admitted layfan. haha. 

Also, want to clarify that I'm a big KL fan and think he has a bright future. Please don't misread my criticism as 'trashing'.

The 5 stars says he should be good.  He should have a higher ceiling than other.  That we brought him here for a reason.  Doesn't always work out that way but its the assumption.  I think people don't expect him to start or not get pulled when makes a mistake but it seems he doesn't get the same leash other do.  When he makes a mistake he immediately get yanked and then that is usually it.  Just seems weird to me.  But i am not coach and i don't see practice so there is a reason for everything i guess

[Hoosierhoopster]

5 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

You mean if you take AF away.  Hunter really hasn't shot enough to have to a huge impact on the overall shooting percentage.  He is 9 of 26, Franklin is 20 of 42.

With all players We are 65 of 199 = .327
Without Hunter we are 56 of 173 = .324
Without Franklin we are 45 of 157 = .287
Without Both we are 36 of 131 = .275

So lets me honest.  Hunter isn't hurting or helping our shooting percentage.  Its Franklin.  Without him we lose 10 percent, we're in real trouble when he isn't on the floor

 

Again, it's time and volume. Hunter can shoot, he isn't shooting enough, because he hasn't been given enough rope, that's basically the point. You list all players, by doing so you emphasize the point, we need more shooting from guys who can hit. And btw, it's also misleading because we know Al can shoot, every year, over the course of the entire season, his percentages have gone up, to 38% last year. One of my concerns with CAM's offensive mindset set is that it is limiting on outside shooting. He has publicly stated he wants to increase spacing and shooting by limiting TO's. The idea underlying that is better movement leading to better looks without turning the ball over -- that, itself, is a good thing -- but he has been hesitant to let guys shoot, including blowing up on the sideline when they do, and his spacing ideology has often run against the three-point shot as a tool to spread the floor. But gradually we've begun to see him loosen that up a bit, and that's a good thing too.

[IowaHoosierFan]

2 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Again, it's time and volume. Hunter can shoot, he isn't shooting enough, because he hasn't been given enough rope, that's basically the point. You list all players, by doing so you emphasize the point, we need more shooting from guys who can hit. And btw, it's also misleading because we know Al can shoot, every year, over the course of the entire season, his percentages have gone up, to 38% last year. One of my concerns with CAM's offensive mindset set is that it is limiting on outside shooting. He has publicly stated he wants to increase spacing and shooting by limiting TO's. The idea underlying that is better movement leading to better looks without turning the ball over -- that, itself, is a good thing -- but he has been hesitant to let guys shoot, including blowing up on the sideline when they do, and his spacing ideology has often run against the three-point shot as a tool to spread the floor. But gradually we've begun to see him loosen that up a bit, and that's a good thing too.

Ok i am done with this conversation.  I won't post on it anymore.  You and I are not going to agree on Hunter.  I hope you're right but i think you're wrong.  I will leave it at that.  I am tired and you and I won't change our point of view.

[Hoosierhoopster]

1 hour ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

I think you and IUFLA are willing to die on the Hunter hill and not many other on here are.  Its ok if we don't agree with your.  When you're right it will be that much sweeter and we will gladly eat crow.  But he is no longer trending upward.  He trended at the end of the season and then for some reason re-set.  He obviously isn't getting it done in practice (probably defense) since he isn't starting, or seeing the floor alot (Although last night he got 20 minutes)

You see something that the rest of us just don't.  We see an average 3 point shooter, who makes bad defensive mistakes, questionable situational offensive decisions and isn't showing the 40% shooting consistency that he had the last 10 games of 2019.  

And its ok.  Be the Hunter cheerleader you think he needs.  Just respect that others don't see the same version of him that you do.

actually he "trended" back up to 35% shooting from yesterday, because, hello, he got more run in 19-20 minutes, and the opportunity to shoot, which mirrored where he was, playing wise, in the last 10 or so games. It's all good that we/people disagree, it's ridiculous, however, when people pointedly ignore the coach saying he's one of the best three point shooters (hello, that's not my opinion, it's fact), and that the first part of last season he was coming off a lost year and barely playing, and that when he did play, over the last 10 games or so, he averaged 40-plus percent, etc. If you can't see that, it's on you.

[IUFLA]

13 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

With all players We are 65 of 199 = .327
Without Hunter we are 56 of 173 = .324
Without Franklin we are 45 of 157 = .287
Without Both we are 36 of 131 = .275

So lets me honest.  Hunter isn't hurting or helping our shooting percentage.  Its Franklin.  Without him we lose 10 percent, we're in real trouble when he isn't on the floor

33% with all players and 29% without Franklin isn't a 10% difference...

[Hoosierhoopster]

1 minute ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

Ok i am done with this conversation.  I won't post on it anymore.  You and I are not going to agree on Hunter.  I hope you're right but i think you're wrong.  I will leave it at that.  I am tired and you and I won't change our point of view.

On this, we agree.

[Hoosierhoopster]

1 hour ago, tdhoosier said:

I can't imagine he'll transfer....not after this year at least. While you get glimpses of potential, I don't see a player who is ready for college basketball right now. I'm not sure he'd be playing more than 10-15 minutes at any power 5 school. He was small for a junior yet alone a kid who was going to skip a year. I get the impression that he's more patient than our fanbase about his development.

I think we just need to accept the fact he's not going to be a major contributor this year and CAM will get him minutes when possible. I'm only going off of body language but KL appears to be accepting his role. He's animated/engaged on the bench and you can also tell he knows when he did something wrong (commits a dumb foul, gets lost on defense, makes a bad pass). It's not like coach is taking him out for no good reason. I'd rather have kid recognize and learn from his mistakes rather then act like a victim when mistakes happen. He'll adapt and he'll get his shot. He's a great kid with a lot of potential. 

Hope you're right, on his mindset. Lander does seem to have an excellent attitude, a team-first player, an enthusiastic kid.

Do think that at almost any other major program, he would be playing significantly more. Really don't think that's in question. Whether doing so is right or wrong is absolutely fair game for dispute.

Those of us who think he should get more run see the #1 - ranked point guard in his class, young but a kid who sees the floor extremely well, that's how he got there, very quick, who we think can spark the offense, not standing at the top for 5 seconds pounding the air out of the ball while the D sets (as has happened multiple times in our games so far). His limitations so far have been 2: too many shots taken with poor shooting, and defensive breakdowns. CAM has the shortest leash I've ever seen for young, talented kids based on D. I think he takes it too far -- that's my opinion, certainly can be wrong, but when a team's offense looks ugly as hell, and we have an extremely talented point guard sitting on the bench for all but 2 or 3 minutes, I get frustrated. On the other hand, I am a fan of Rob -- he has struggled, but he's usually an excellent defender, and WHEN aggressive is usually productive. The problem has been his disappearing acts, and his odd hesitancy to get the offense going. When he's good, he's very good, at the point, imo. So it's a balance, we need Rob at his best, but when we have a very talented point guard just sitting there when the team is struggling, it's just frustrating.

[KoB2011]

Something none of you, on either side of this fascinating and riveting Hunter discussion have mentioned, is that he got playing time at the three yesterday and had a good shooting game. When he was making shots at the end of last year he was playing.... the three.

I think Archie has been hesitant to play him there because we lack depth down low without Brunk, but when we played great in the second half a lot of that was with Hunter at the three. I hope we continue to take that calculated risk of playing Hunter, Thompson, and TJD together for 10+ minutes per game because it was a really good lineup. 

[Hoosierhoopster]

1 minute ago, KoB2011 said:

Something none of you, on either side of this fascinating and riveting Hunter discussion have mentioned, is that he got playing time at the three yesterday and had a good shooting game. When he was making shots at the end of last year he was playing.... the three.

I think Archie has been hesitant to play him there because we lack depth down low without Brunk, but when we played great in the second half a lot of that was with Hunter at the three. I hope we continue to take that calculated risk of playing Hunter, Thompson, and TJD together for 10+ minutes per game because it was a really good lineup. 

Yep, and he's really a wing, not a 4. And Race had a strong double-double game, that was very encouraging.

[NCHoosier32]

3 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Something none of you, on either side of this fascinating and riveting Hunter discussion have mentioned, is that he got playing time at the three yesterday and had a good shooting game. When he was making shots at the end of last year he was playing.... the three.

I think Archie has been hesitant to play him there because we lack depth down low without Brunk, but when we played great in the second half a lot of that was with Hunter at the three. I hope we continue to take that calculated risk of playing Hunter, Thompson, and TJD together for 10+ minutes per game because it was a really good lineup. 

agreed, but again, not asking him to play excellent defense, but for the love of God, he can't kill us with ridiculous fouls on top of getting beat and being out of position!  at least don't make those type of killer plays on that end.

[IUFLA]

5 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Hope you're right, on his mindset. Lander does seem to have an excellent attitude, a team-first player, an enthusiastic kid.

Do think that at almost any other major program, he would be playing significantly more. Really don't think that's in question. Whether doing so is right or wrong is absolutely fair game for dispute.

Those of us who think he should get more run see the #1 - ranked point guard in his class, young but a kid who sees the floor extremely well, that's how he got there, very quick, who we think can spark the offense, not standing at the top for 5 seconds pounding the air out of the ball while the D sets (as has happened multiple times in our games so far). His limitations so far have been 2: too many shots taken with poor shooting, and defensive breakdowns. CAM has the shortest leash I've ever seen for young, talented kids based on D. I think he takes it too far -- that's my opinion, certainly can be wrong, but when a team's offense looks ugly as hell, and we have an extremely talented point guard sitting on the bench for all but 2 or 3 minutes, I get frustrated. On the other hand, I am a fan of Rob -- he has struggled, but he's usually an excellent defender, and WHEN aggressive is usually productive. The problem has been his disappearing acts, and his odd hesitancy to get the offense going. When he's good, he's very good, at the point, imo. So it's a balance, we need Rob at his best, but when we have a very talented point guard just sitting there when the team is struggling, it's just frustrating.

The difference between the way Archie uses Lander and the way Underwood uses Curbelo is that Illinois has players that can cover Curbelo's weaknesses, and we don't...our margin for error is much thinner...If we had that caliber of talent around Khristian, he'd play more...we just can't afford it if we want to win games...

[KoB2011]

9 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Hope you're right, on his mindset. Lander does seem to have an excellent attitude, a team-first player, an enthusiastic kid.

Do think that at almost any other major program, he would be playing significantly more. Really don't think that's in question. Whether doing so is right or wrong is absolutely fair game for dispute.

Those of us who think he should get more run see the #1 - ranked point guard in his class, young but a kid who sees the floor extremely well, that's how he got there, very quick, who we think can spark the offense, not standing at the top for 5 seconds pounding the air out of the ball while the D sets (as has happened multiple times in our games so far). His limitations so far have been 2: too many shots taken with poor shooting, and defensive breakdowns. CAM has the shortest leash I've ever seen for young, talented kids based on D. I think he takes it too far -- that's my opinion, certainly can be wrong, but when a team's offense looks ugly as hell, and we have an extremely talented point guard sitting on the bench for all but 2 or 3 minutes, I get frustrated. On the other hand, I am a fan of Rob -- he has struggled, but he's usually an excellent defender, and WHEN aggressive is usually productive. The problem has been his disappearing acts, and his odd hesitancy to get the offense going. When he's good, he's very good, at the point, imo. So it's a balance, we need Rob at his best, but when we have a very talented point guard just sitting there when the team is struggling, it's just frustrating.

Walker Kessler, who was ranked higher in the 247 composite than Lander, is averaging less minutes per game than him. It isn't THAT strange for a 5 star to not come in and play major minutes, especially when you're talking about a situation like Lander's. 

Also worth noting, you can't say he was the number 1 ranked point guard in his class and honestly complain about his lack of playing time. The class he was ranked number 1 in is a class that is still playing in high school living with their parents, not the class he chose to come to college with. There is a reason he took a drop in the recruiting rankings when he reclassified, and it is 100% because of physical maturity. 

[KoB2011]

1 minute ago, NCHoosier32 said:

agreed, but again, not asking him to play excellent defense, but for the love of God, he can't kill us with ridiculous fouls on top of getting beat and being out of position!  at least don't make those type of killer plays on that end.

I completely agree. The fouls were terrible. 

[tdhoosier]

42 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

The difference between the way Archie uses Lander and the way Underwood uses Curbelo is that Illinois has players that can cover Curbelo's weaknesses, and we don't...our margin for error is much thinner...If we had that caliber of talent around Khristian, he'd play more...we just can't afford it if we want to win games...

Interesting comparison. Now, if KL was playing like Curbelo then I'd be right with everybody asking for more playing time. I agree our margin for error is narrower, but Curbelo is a better player than Lander right now. He's more ready on the offensive end. I don't even think that's open for debate. He makes things happen on offense, he's more crafty and he gets into the lane at ease. If Lander was doing that on the offensive side then I think I could over look his defensive struggles.....but he's not. Everybody keeps on saying that KL is fast and athletic, but those traits haven't transferred into production. 

[Hoosierhoopster]

52 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Walker Kessler, who was ranked higher in the 247 composite than Lander, is averaging less minutes per game than him. It isn't THAT strange for a 5 star to not come in and play major minutes, especially when you're talking about a situation like Lander's. 

Also worth noting, you can't say he was the number 1 ranked point guard in his class and honestly complain about his lack of playing time. The class he was ranked number 1 in is a class that is still playing in high school living with their parents, not the class he chose to come to college with. There is a reason he took a drop in the recruiting rankings when he reclassified, and it is 100% because of physical maturity. 

Yes fair points. I was one of the few here who early on speculated he might not start because he reclassified and is young, joining IU at 17 years old. I caught a lot of flack for that too, lol. Then there was a lot of talk from the players and CAM about running a three-ball handler group to push the ball, and anticipated, wrongly, that that meant Lander would start. There's always a guy out there like Kessler, but that's one guy. It doesn't reflect what most major programs would do. I do think what we see is CAM holding young guys out, limiting their floor time, when their D isn't up to his stringent standards. He did the same thing with Hunter last year. In any event, I can honestly complain about Lander's playing time -- because I think we need the offense, because the on-ball guards in multiple games have underperformed offensively. I could be wrong on that, but that doesn't mean I can't honestly complain about it. 

[Hoosierhoopster]

55 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

The difference between the way Archie uses Lander and the way Underwood uses Curbelo is that Illinois has players that can cover Curbelo's weaknesses, and we don't...our margin for error is much thinner...If we had that caliber of talent around Khristian, he'd play more...we just can't afford it if we want to win games...

Definitely a fair view. I think we do have the players but it's hard to see how that would pan out without actually getting to see him play. Maybe we'll see as the season progresses -- hope so.

[addictedtoIU]

12 hours ago, HoosierFaithful said:

Hunter is a perfect microcosm of these players, this team, Archie, all of it:

I want to love you but god damn, you make it so hard on me sometimes.

I wish I could give you 100 Likes. 

[IowaHoosierFan]

1 hour ago, IUFLA said:

33% with all players and 29% without Franklin isn't a 10% difference...

Sorry, i looked at the numbers and came up with 10.

I stand corrected, its 4% without Franklin

[IUFLA]

41 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

but Curbelo is a better player than Lander right now.

I'm not sure we've seen enough of KL in game action to make that statement...I've seen Curbelo make some atrocious decisions on the break (and on the offensive end in general), going up to 4 on 1 and just charging at the rim...I've probably watched 5 of their games, and it's happened multiple times...He's a talented kid, but he's got more than a few flaws to his game...

But that was my point...Illinois has a player (Ayo) that can pretty much take the team on his back and help them win...Underwood can let Curbelo get some OJT and still win...we don't have that luxury...

If we did, I'd almost guarantee KL would get more minutes...

[IowaHoosierFan]

1 minute ago, IUFLA said:

I'm not sure we've seen enough of KL in game action to make that statement...I've seen Curbelo make some atrocious decisions on the break (and on the offensive end in general), going up to 4 on 1 and just charging at the rim...I've probably watched 5 of their games, and it's happened multiple times...He's a talented kid, but he's got more than a few flaws to his game...

But that was my point...Illinois has a player (Ayo) that can pretty much take the team on his back and help them win...Underwood can let Curbelo get some OJT and still win...we don't have that luxury...

If we did, I'd almost guarantee KL would get more minutes...

I thought Curbelo looked horrible out there most of the time.  Like he was not ready to be on the floor but you are correct that they have Ayo to make up for his mistakes by playing so well.  But man, he was hard to watch at times.

[BGleas]

1 hour ago, KoB2011 said:

Something none of you, on either side of this fascinating and riveting Hunter discussion have mentioned, is that he got playing time at the three yesterday and had a good shooting game. When he was making shots at the end of last year he was playing.... the three.

I think Archie has been hesitant to play him there because we lack depth down low without Brunk, but when we played great in the second half a lot of that was with Hunter at the three. I hope we continue to take that calculated risk of playing Hunter, Thompson, and TJD together for 10+ minutes per game because it was a really good lineup. 

This is a great point! Hunter was able to grab some of Franklin's missing minutes and I not only think it benefitted Hunter but it also benefitted the team. 

During that stretch is when we started really dominating the boards on both ends, which Hunter played a role in. It just made the lineup bigger. 

Hunter is probably a bit of a negative on the boards when playing the 4 but he's a positive when playing the 3. 

That team rebounding improvement is huge, it allows them to play quicker, get in transition more and offensively clean up some of those bricks. 

[IUFLA]

4 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

I thought Curbelo looked horrible out there most of the time.  Like he was not ready to be on the floor but you are correct that they have Ayo to make up for his mistakes by playing so well.  But man, he was hard to watch at times.

Just looked...the first 6 games of the year Curbelo's assist to turnover ratio (which I put a lot of stock in for PGs) was less than 1 to 1...Last 5 games it's 3 to 1...