go_iu_bb

1 hour ago, BGleas said:

Yeah, agree. Take guys like Banks and Gunn.

Banks looked really good in the UConn game when he got extended minutes with the starters because MM was in foul trouble. 

He did not look great yesterday in the full sub lineup. 

Gunn struggles in the full sub lineup, but played well in the Michigan game when he got extended minutes with the starters. 

Play the bench, but play them in situations where they can play a role and be successful. 

Yes, piecemeal substitutions instead of groups. Only 1 or 2 bench players in at a time.

The starters should be getting 30+ mpg on this team. Maybe more than that, like 35 mpg.

Is IU's defense what Timberlake needs to have a breakout game?

Xavier Johnson didn't make any bad plays the whole game.

5 minutes ago, 13th&Jackson said:

“We really wanted to have someone that knew how to play the game, but at the same time could really help us athletically,” Willard said. “... Jordan’s as athletic as a player as I’ve seen in a while.”

“I call him a Swiss Army knife. He can kind of do a little bit of everything,” Willard said.

😂

Emphasis on "little bit," I guess. He only has a "little bit" of shooting ability, a "little bit" of defense, a "little bit" of taking care of the ball, etc etc 

1 hour ago, dgambill said:

Would love to know what his shooting statistics are. We desperately need knock down perimeter shooters. How can every other team find shooters and we still can’t. 

Somewhere between just good enough to keep defenses honest and best ever evaluated. I've seen his shooting described as both.

6 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

Going to bring this up again. Xavier Booker. 5 star McDonald's All American not seeing the court at all...especially at a position of need for Sparty. I mean it has to be personal at this point because Booker is better than the backups I watch for Sparty.

 

Better in high school or college? High school? Sure, I'll buy that. College? Not really. He's been terrible when he's played.

9 minutes ago, Huntnfreak said:

Harper to Rutgers.

OMG, I'm so shocked!

27 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I think you and I have different understandings of how the selection process works.

If our NET and other metrics are 10 spots lower because of these games, that can impact which side of the bubble we end up on. Of course the next three months will play a large part in that, I don't think anyone is saying otherwise, but yes having worse metrics impacts you. If it can move us down a seedling, it can move us onto the wrong side of the bubble. 

For getting into the tournament the committee cares most about winning games, especially for high major teams. If IU is on the bubble or worse, it will be because they didn't win enough games. They won the games they were supposed to win in November so if they're on the bubble that means they didn't win enough in December-March. Those would be the games I would look at for reasons why IU didn't make the tournament over games they won but just weren't efficient enough to help their NET ranking.

15 hours ago, rogue3542 said:

I hate how the quads re-arrange themselves every day.  It's a very disingenuous feature of the NET.  You should get credit for how good that team was when you played them - and I understand that can be challenging to rank teams with these advanced statistical models earlier than halfway through the season.

Take for example football.  If you played Maryland in September this year (or any year really), it's more akin to playing Ohio State.  Play them later in October, not so much.

Same thing in basketball.  Playing Purdue in November vs late February.

A team that lost it's star players and plummeted down the rankings by the end of the season shouldn't negate how great a win over them early in the season was.

It works both ways. It hurts if you beat a team that is thought to be good then the wheels come off on their season and they end up with a terrible record. It helps if you beat a team that isn't thought to be good at the time which then ends up having a great season.

Early in the season especially it's hard to say if it's a good win or not. It's not uncommon for a team to start out ranked and then miss the tournament nor is it uncommon for a team thought to be terrible have a great season and make the tournament.

Should teams really get credit for beating a bad team just because it was thought at the time to be a good team? Should they be penalized for beating a good team that was thought to be bad?

Yes, injuries happen that can drastically change a team. How would you differentiate between that and teams who just don't play well?

9 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I don't understand this statement. How can it impact your seed but not making the tournament?

Sure, this won’t be the only thing if we miss the tournament but a November we didn’t take care of business would be a part of it, no?

Because they won the games. What they really care about when it comes to making the tournament are win totals. When it's bubble teams, they look at bad losses which IU doesn't have. IU's SOS will be good by the time the season ends, so if they have 20+ wins they should make the tournament with no problem. And if they're a bubble team, that means they didn't do well the whole season so games in November would only be a part of the problem.

However, when it comes to seeding they will might look at these games and move IU down to give another team with a similar record a better seed if that team blew out all of its cupcakes instead of struggling. 

48 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

If we don’t like our seed or miss the tournament, look back at November. 

Seed? Sure, I can see that. You don't make or miss the tournament in November.  If IU is a bubble team, that means they spent the whole season not playing very well, not just November.

1 hour ago, china423 said:

 

2 more days until I don't have to hear about him until next year when we play Rutgers. Great.

28 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

 

Awesome because it's the Kansas game so the atmosphere should be great. Yikes because it's the Kansas game and it may not be close.

3 minutes ago, bluegrassIU said:

Agree. The reps will help. He is seeing double teams, and defense geared towards him that he never had to deal with last year.

Sure there will be a learning curve, but as you said, he is getting better and better.

Let's not forget that even player like TJD take time to grow and improve. He wasn't nearly as good of a passer and didn't have the court vision he ended his college career with at first. He got better every year and his assist numbers show that by increasing every year before making a huge jump his senior year. Through the first 3 years he was under 2 assists per game. Reneau is at over 3 assists per game this year. So just going by that he's ahead of where TJD was at the same point in his career.

19 minutes ago, toonsquad said:

https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-net-rankings

Indiana comes in at no. 137 in the first NET rankings. Seems less than ideal but just keep winning games and things will work itself out. 

That's what happens when you struggle against bad teams, even if you win. I saw on another site that for some reason the Harvard game is being counted as a home game instead of neutral court, which also doesn't help.

8 minutes ago, SawatchHoosier said:

I for one enjoyed the friendly banter and discussion. 

Even the 17th time they repeated themselves? 😲

I'm exhausted just reading through the last few pages of this thread. Man. Tedious.

1 hour ago, BobSaccamanno said:

There’s almost no shot that Ware is back. He’s putting great potential on tape for the NBA scouts.  Woody has been phenomenal with him.   If that is what Queen wants to see, then there it is.  

Agreed. Before the season even started, it was thought he was gone regardless of how this season went. So if he was willing to jump to the NBA after a bad season, no way he stays after the season he's having.

5 minutes ago, bluegrassIU said:

This can't be right, can it?

Not if that picture is from the game.  If it's just a stock photo, then I wouldn't be surprised.

23 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Yeah, they have some good players. They're not a good team, at least not right now. Their pieces aren't great together. They have a starter that hardly played on our team the last three years. 

I think we both agree that it was great to see IU handle business in a strong way. 

 

Yes, it's a team which is less than the sum of its parts.

He's just athletic enough to not be a stiff. Being huge is his greatest skill.

2 minutes ago, Hoosier987 said:

Mgbako continues to gain confidence. He’s been really engaged the last couple of games. I suspect he will only get better. 
 

Sparks looks unplayable. He’s 3-15 from free throws. He was all freshman in Mac. Really shows the difference in big man play between mid major and high major.

Maryland is not a good team. How many air balls did I see them produce? At least 2 on one possession. 

Sparks seems like he just needs to relax a bit. He always seems too pumped and that's not helping him stay in the game mentally. There was one sequence where he fouled a MD player and they got into it a bit. Then on the ensuing FT, he had a lane violation. 

I didn't see him play at BSU, was he this emotional/excitable there? He obviously wasn't when it came time to shoot FT as he was much better there than he is at IU so far.

Jordan Geronimo

1 hour ago, ledies22 said:

Taking and making is completely different, but lets just say its 10 possessions.

IU is shooting 60% from 2 and 24% from 3. On 10 possessions that's 12 points vs 6 or 9 points. If the other team is SHOOTING 10 more 3's and they make it at a 40% clip. That is 12 points on 10 possessions. If they are MAKING 10 more threes a game. they are utiliizing more "empty" trips to get there as they dont shoot 100% to get to that 10 mark. Lets say they shoot 50% from three on those 10 extra makes. that's 20 possessions. If we were to shoot all 2's on 20 possessions shooting 60% that is 24 points to their 30. If we were to shoot all threes on those 20 possessions, we would score 15 points. 

My point. We do not need to shoot more threes because the other teams is. 

GC - 28%

CJ - 0%

MM - 11%

TG - 17%

Hopefully these guys can start making 3's at a better clip. 

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/indiana/men/2024.html

It would be a terrible idea to shoot more 3s right now with how bad the team currently is at making them. I don't see how a higher volume would make that better. If the percentage increases, then they should look at taking more. 

Right now, defending the 3 better should be a huge priority as well as cutting down on the discrepancy in number of shots taken between IU and opponents by cutting down on turnovers and offensive rebounds given up.

In other words, lots of ways to dramatically improve that don't involve shooting more 3s (which right now would probably make things worse). 

37 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

From what I've seen the girl may be as young as 16. There is a such a wide gap between an NBA player, even a young NBA player at 21, and a 16 year old it isn't funny.

Right. I saw she's a junior in HS so probably 16 or 17. Not good for him.