Jump to content

Starting 5 2021-2022


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, NCHoosier32 said:

So while I'm getting all excited (and I am)... one thing that's a little scary is Franklin shot 42.4% from 3 and Al 38% last year.  They are both gone and we replace them with Stewart 34.8%, Kopp 33%, Johnson 32.1%, and all I can find for Bates is stats from his Jr. year, but that was 44%.  That's solid, but he is a freshman, so a little unknown.  For another reference point Hunter was 34.2%.  Granted he is back, but point being, we only added a freshman and a 34.8% shooter that would have been in our top 3 of what was a very poor shooting team.  Before I get attacked, yes, I do think experience will help, different system will help, etc.  

You do have a good point. I think it's also important to remember a couple of things. AF played healthy maybe 50% of the season. To CAM's credit those were high percentage shots, but the volume of 3PA will most likely go up under Woody. The new shooters we have can create their own shot or can catch/shoot running full speed off a screen, whereas AF and Al need to be set.

..And last, which may be my jaded recollection, but those shots you reference never seemed to fall when it mattered. They didn't go in when we fell into our inevitable slumps every game. They didn't fall when we needed to step on the opponents throat. The tighter the game got...the tighter our shooters got. I'm not sure if that was a mental issue or a bi-product of the heavily scripted offense CAM ran. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, NCHoosier32 said:

So while I'm getting all excited (and I am)... one thing that's a little scary is Franklin shot 42.4% from 3 and Al 38% last year.  They are both gone and we replace them with Stewart 34.8%, Kopp 33%, Johnson 32.1%, and all I can find for Bates is stats from his Jr. year, but that was 44%.  That's solid, but he is a freshman, so a little unknown.  For another reference point Hunter was 34.2%.  Granted he is back, but point being, we only added a freshman and a 34.8% shooter that would have been in our top 3 of what was a very poor shooting team.  Before I get attacked, yes, I do think experience will help, different system will help, etc.  

Parker is going to shoot much higher than 35%. That 35 was when he was the only threat offensively... you watch that film vs. his Pitt film. Night and day difference in the quality of shot that he got. I'm not overly found of those numbers either... if they all shoot their career average... we are going to be in a nice spot. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, NCHoosier32 said:

you definitely could be right, but if it's KL or RP playing with X, i don't see it being Lander.  i really think he and X need to be primarily on the ball not wing.  

I think Woodson wants as many ball handlers on the court as possible. He wants a fast pace and if the guy getting the rebound can just get the ball and go it will make it easier for a faster pace.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, btownqb said:

Parker is going to shoot much higher than 35%. That 35 was when he was the only threat offensively... you watch that film vs. his Pitt film. Night and day difference in the quality of shot that he got. I'm not overly found of those numbers either... if they all shoot their career average... we are going to be in a nice spot. 

Parker at UT Martin shot a TON of off the dribble threes. Step back, jab step, side step...pull up...the kid took high level of difficulty shots there. I watched him play Murray St and on local tv (they showed nightly highlights of local OVC teams on the news) along with his OVC tourney. He would take and make anything that resembled open...even contested 3's at a high level when he was set. He also hit some very high level of difficulty 3's...not nearly at the same clip though. Kid was pretty undisciplined with his shot selection....but the talent was easy to see at that level. At the level he will play here and what he will be expected to produce...he will shoot 37-42% safe to say. Good thing is he does have some ability to create when shot clock runs down so I still expect some Devonte Green type moments too.

Not sure what will happen with Xavier...I don't think he will be looked at to shoot a lot of 3's. I think him and Lander will be asked and expected to get down hill and create havoc on a defense...make them collapse and open up shots and finishes down low. Guys like Kopp and Hunter and Leal should absolutely benefit in open looks and shoot good percentages. When Rob gets his feet together and set is a solid 3pt shooter as well. I expect Bates to be up and down but hopefully as the season progresses he can shows signs as well...he certainly has good form and seems to be a confident kid. Any improvements we get from Galloway, Geronimo, and Race from 3 will just be gravy. Will we improve over last year?? If we don't then wow...we will be a very bad team...but I feel confident just the open aspect of the offense and changes will yield better shooting and more confidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, btownqb said:

Those shooters are going to be helped by having TJD just as much as vice versa. Kid was 18p 9r a game in the B1G last year. 

Trayce's scoring might not go up a whole lot but hopefully his assist numbers do. He is absolutely going to need to be ready to pass out of double teams. I think the whole change in the offense will benefit him greatly....will make helping off very difficult and we should make teams pay for even thinking of doubling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NCHoosier32 said:

So while I'm getting all excited (and I am)... one thing that's a little scary is Franklin shot 42.4% from 3 and Al 38% last year.  They are both gone and we replace them with Stewart 34.8%, Kopp 33%, Johnson 32.1%, and all I can find for Bates is stats from his Jr. year, but that was 44%.  That's solid, but he is a freshman, so a little unknown.  For another reference point Hunter was 34.2%.  Granted he is back, but point being, we only added a freshman and a 34.8% shooter that would have been in our top 3 of what was a very poor shooting team.  Before I get attacked, yes, I do think experience will help, different system will help, etc.  

This is a fair point. I'd point out though that Armaan and Al with those numbers were still hitting less than 2 three pointers per game on average. If IU can have 4, 5, 6 or more guys hitting at or near 35% or higher from three it will be virtually impossible for a defense to account for all of them. 

Last season IU basically had Al and Armaan as deep threats and Armaan missed 14 games.... so it was really just Al to game plan for outside.  Occasionally a streaky Hunter would get hot and you would have to guard him also. The rest of the time the defense could sit back and watch IU hand off he ball around the perimeter hoping anyone else would shoot and miss. Rob with his 26% from deep was no threat at all.

My guess is XJ's ability to get to the middle will open up multiple shooters, and TJD will still be drawing double teams opening up the shooters. There will be shots to be had from outside.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know people are concerned with our size but we have to realize...it is very possible that what we might lose in say Race not starting and going to the bench is made up in TEAM rebounding. We *possibly* have gone from starting 

6'1 Rob **that's very generous** 6'4 Al **also generous but nontheless played smaller 6'4 Armaan 6'8 Race 6'9 Trayce

to  6'3 Xavier 6'5 Bates 6'5 Parker 6'7 Kopp/Hunter and 6'9 Trayce.  No matter how you slice it up we've gotten much bigger in the back court and stayed mostly the same in the front court. I think we have enough size to give most teams a ton of trouble. I mean look at Maryland and OSU last year...not HUGE teams...Michigan had a big down low but didn't really play two bigs....they just had lots of good size on their wings. As long as we can contain the ball on defense..I think the added size in the back court more than makes up for size at the 4.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, dgambill said:

I know people are concerned with our size but we have to realize...it is very possible that what we might lose in say Race not starting and going to the bench is made up in TEAM rebounding. We *possibly* have gone from starting 

6'1 Rob **that's very generous** 6'4 Al **also generous but nontheless played smaller 6'4 Armaan 6'8 Race 6'9 Trayce

to  6'3 Xavier 6'5 Bates 6'5 Parker 6'7 Kopp/Hunter and 6'9 Trayce.  No matter how you slice it up we've gotten much bigger in the back court and stayed mostly the same in the front court. I think we have enough size to give most teams a ton of trouble. I mean look at Maryland and OSU last year...not HUGE teams...Michigan had a big down low but didn't really play two bigs....they just had lots of good size on their wings. As long as we can contain the ball on defense..I think the added size in the back court more than makes up for size at the 4.

The fact they did not go out and add another guy 6'8 or bigger to work inside leads me to believe they are confident Duncomb can come in and contribute. Otherwise, the loss of Brunk should have been addressed by adding more size. It's a matter of forcing the opponent to adjust to IU's quickness and shooting rather than IU trying to match up with the size of the opponent.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Euroclydon said:

The fact they did not go out and add another guy 6'8 or bigger to work inside leads me to believe they are confident Duncomb can come in and contribute. Otherwise, the loss of Brunk should have been addressed by adding more size. It's a matter of forcing the opponent to adjust to IU's quickness and shooting rather than IU trying to match up with the size of the opponent.

We have TJD, Race and Duncomb.  Duncomb will be third off the bench.  Brunk’s role was going to be significantly reduced which is why he transferred. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, IU_Realist said:

We have TJD, Race and Duncomb.  Duncomb will be third off the bench.  Brunk’s role was going to be significantly reduced which is why he transferred. 

Probably makes more sense to play Logan early to get him as experienced and polished as possible. Brunk was only going to be here a year anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bowhunter said:

Probably makes more sense to play Logan early to get him as experienced and polished as possible. Brunk was only going to be here a year anyway.

You play who gives you the best opportunity to win. Duncomb will get his time in either a limited role or redshirting.  Practice is better for him improving.  He is playing against the best big in the B10.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, IU_Realist said:

You play who gives you the best opportunity to win. Duncomb will get his time in either a limited role or redshirting.  Practice is better for him improving.  He is playing against the best big in the B10.  

Coaching staff must believe in him

Edited by Bowhunter
Voice texting sucks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BobSaccamanno said:

Now that the roster is taking shape

1. XP, Lander, RP

2.  Stewart, Bates, Leal

3.  Kopp, Galloway 

4.  Thompson, Geronimo, Hunter

5.  TJD, Duncomb 

Lot of versatility though.  We have some good length in the back court and multi-positional players.  

I bet our practices will be hellacious...Shoot, I bet the open gym sessions now are something to behold...

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IU Scott said:

After thinking it over this is what I hope the lineup looks like at the start not the season.

Lander/RP.

Johnson/Stewart

Bates/Hunter./Galloway

Kopp/Geronimo

TJD/Race.

I would also Redshirt Leal and Duncomb

 

 

XJ does not play off the ball. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...