Jump to content

go_iu_bb

Members
  • Posts

    2,007
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by go_iu_bb

  1. 1 hour ago, NotIThatLives said:

    No one has said it that I've seen but Galloway, outside of a few layups, was not very good last night either.  He got beat off the dribble somewhere in the ballpark of 79 times.  He needs to take notes in the film room of Kopp and start playing smarter, especially if he is going to be required to give extended minutes.  He can't go 1000 mph, gamble, let guys blow by him and get into the lane, then have a 10 second call.  Come on.  But he's smart so he will likely adapt.  

    That turnover when he tried the wrap around pass to TJD who was looking to rebound and not expecting a pass was not a veryv good play. 

  2. 5 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

    Yep, exactly who I thought it was...

    Screenshot_20230104-170419.thumb.png.862229853e05d23ea20bd63d7c7c9832.png

    This guy will destroy a forum if you let him... I've seen it happen more than once... 

    I used to be on Peegs/rivals. Which idiot was this guy?

    Speaking of trash, that is a good way to describe the rivals forums.

  3. 4 minutes ago, Kdug said:

    The Def Reb % said in a better way is the opponents offensive rebound %, so that is actually worse. So we went from a net positive in turnover margin and rebound margin last year (though they were both relatively small positives) to negative in both. Again, just 6 games, and we’ve had a couple stinkers in there that skew the numbers a bit. But I still found it interesting.

    I thought that was the percentage of defensive rebounds the team gets, so I guess I had it backwards. That makes sense because it then it should have been around 70%+. So giving up more offensive rebounds to the other teams along with more turnovers and shooting fewer FT. Yikes.

  4. 44 minutes ago, Kdug said:

    I was looking back at IU's 6 games against top 100 opponents thus far, and wanted to see how we compared statistically vs last year. Last year, it felt like a lot of games simply came down to IU's ability to make shots, where this year we have seemed to shoot the ball better, but have struggled in other areas. Looking at the 4 factors - Effective field goal %, Turnover %, rebounding %, and free throw rate, here's how we compare so far this year vs last against top 100 opponents:

    2021:

    Off EFG% vs Def EFG%: 47.8% | 49.7%

    Off TO% vs Def TO%: 16.2% | 17.2%

    Off Reb% vs Def Reb%: 26.4% | 26.1%

    Off FTR vs Def FTR: 32.1% | 34.4%

    2022:

    Off EFG% vs Def EFG%: 50.0% | 48.8%

    Off TO% vs Def TO%: 19.1% | 17.0%

    Off Reb% vs Def Reb%: 28.0% | 32.1%

    Off FTR vs Def FTR: 26.5% | 30.8%

    It's only 6 games, so don't want to draw any conclusions, but so far IU has improved on the weakness from last year (EFG%), but have regressed in the other areas. Also when you look at our three losses, we got dominated on the boards in two of them (Rutgers and Arizona) and dominated in the turnover battle in the other (Kansas). Will be interesting to see if this changes going forward.

    Assuming I'm understanding those stats correctly:

    Better: Off and Def eFG%, Off and Def Reb%, Def FTR.

    Worse: Off and Def TO%, Off FTR.

    Defensive TO% is almost the same but slightly lower in 2022. Offensive TO% is way up while Offensive FTR is way down. While they're doing lots of things better, they're turning the ball over a lot more while getting to the line a lot less. Not a good combination.

  5. 1 hour ago, IUFLA said:

    It doesn't though...I accidently cut off the left side (did the initial on my phone)...

    image.png.be99a0378d8dd6868491f844a3e07633.png

    Look, I understand the argument from a fairness standpoint, but to say that dividing the tournament into classes has nothing to do with declining attendance just isn't an arguable point...

    Attendance was already dropping. It appears that moving to multiple classes accelerated the decline but it is doubtful that it's the sole cause since it was already dropping.

    My guess as well why it fell was that people were willing to go when the games were close to home (<30 minutes) but not as willing to travel longer than that. 

    • Like 1
  6. 14 hours ago, IUFLA said:

    Fire em up on New Years Eve!

    1652463295_giphy(4)(1).gif.a09f9861cf85f3e8e7328a21cecb1a7e.gif

    I'm my mind, Priller is the poster child for what's been wrong with IU basketball the past 2 decades. 4 years of scholarship wasted on a player who wasn't good enough to deserve the scholarship but also didn't seem to take it seriously. 

    • Like 1
  7. 2 hours ago, IUFLA said:

    I think they said she played basketball at DePauw...

    Maybe scholarship money (if she was on an athletic scholarship... I'm not sure how much a D3 scholarship covers any way) didn't cover it...

    Anthony's good deed is getting national press...

    Which is a good thing all the way around

    As @mrflynn03says, there are no athletic scholarships at the D3 level. They are, however, held to the same "amateurism" rules as D1. I could've swam for a D3 school but decided to forgo collegiate sports and go to a larger school instead. 

    • Like 2
  8. 1 hour ago, IUFLA said:

    Doesn't matter how he got them (short of stealing of course)... In fact, he is in a partnership with Bose... And I'm sure they expect something from his end... 

    A good kid doing a good thing...

     

    I doubt that was a promotional move on his part. If it was, it was a terrible video for it as they don't make easy to see what he's giving out. 1 person quickly mentions that they're Bose in a way that is easily missed. No closeup of the box or anything. I had to watch it a couple of times and turn up the volume to figure out what they were.

    Terrible commercial if that was that was the intent. More likely is just an awesome move on the part of JHS and pretty cynical of those who think otherwise.

  9. 5 hours ago, Coach Robby said:

    Just for the love of God eliminate so many tv timeouts. Go every 5  minutes, not 4. Or every 6. It's too disruptive to the flow of the game, especially early on

    The chances of that happening are pretty much nil. If changes are made to the number and frequency of TV timeouts, adding even more in is more likely than taking some away.

    I would also love to see fewer of them, but it just won't happen; money and contracts are the reason why.

×
×
  • Create New...