go_iu_bb

21 minutes ago, BornHoosier said:

I’m so confused if Logan is received as an exciting 4* commitment or a player we should have passed?  Normally when a player commits, HSN is happy with glee but I didn’t sense that with this one?  IMO, the kid is so young that his body hasn’t filled out yet and fans see there is no way to compete in this league as is.  Correct, which is why we shouldn’t suggest meaningful minutes until his JR season but after that the sky is the limit for this kid.  Maybe we’re spoiled with immediate contributions from players like Jerrod Jeffries, Noah Von, Cody Zeller or TJD but these players are RARE.  End of day, I’m sure HSN will be very happy with this commit!

Yes, you are confused. What's being said in this thread is not that we should have passed. No one is saying that it's a bad commitment nor are they saying that it's bad due to no outside shot.

Interest had been shown for PG Braden Smith (currently unranked). I don't believe he's been offered yet.

It's so odd to me to have people arguing against bigs increasing their shooting range. The more versatile any player is, the more that helps them and the team. Big men, especially, who can shoot or play down low create real match up problems for the defenders. And if they can also put it on the floor and/or pass well they are all but unstoppable. They can pull rim protectors away from the basket giving the guards and wings the option to drive or shoot. A versatile big puts a lot of stress on the defense. They don't even have to shoot a lot of 3s, just show that they're willing to and very capable of hitting them.

And if they're going to develop range, it makes more sense to extend that range out to 3-point range than just a long 2. It's more efficient plus defenses might be willing to let the big men shoot and possibly hit a few long 2s per game while they would certainly try to defend the 3. Like I said above, if a team can force another team to shoot long 2s, they have a chance to win.

1 minute ago, btownqb said:

You're spot on.. expect.. the 18-20ft jump shot is the worst shot you can take, analytically speaking. 

Touche.

You are correct but my point stands that it is still not a good shot and certainly not the best shot. And I did say "about the worst." 😉

59 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

 To me the best and easiest shots for a good basketball player to hit is the 12-15 jump shot from the wing or baseline but that is totally taken away in todays game.

The thing about analytics is they don't care how you, me, or anyone else feels. They're based on actual numbers from actual games played. The 12'-15' jump shot is about the worst shot you can take. It counts the same as a dunk, layup, or shot from 2' away but is hit at a much lower percentage. It might be hit at a higher percentage than a 3-pointer but not enough to compensate that the 3-pointer is also worth 50% more.

It was true "back in the day" and it's still true now that if you force a team to shoot a lot of long range 2-pointers you're more likely than not going to win the game.

It wasn't called "analytics" back then (at least not as a widely used term that normal fans knew) but Pitino's Kentucky teams were one of the first to employ this style of play or, at least, the most well known and successful with it. I remember watching the games and the announcers talking about how he wanted his team to either get dunks or shoot a 3. That was 30 years ago so it isn't a new thing to college basketball but is ubiquitous now and was uncommon then.

3 hours ago, milehiiu said:

I have no idea, what kind of free throw shooter Logan is. But FT shooting is an aspect that can always be worked on. I'd much rather that before coming to IU, than working on an outside shot, before getting to IU.

I read he's a 64% FT shooter. Definitely something I hope he improves on.

4 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

Cringing. Because of how the experiment turned out for De'Ron.... and hopes that it does not work out the same for Logan.  Oh, I do agree. That to have a big who can come out and hit a trey once in a while is an additional weapon.  Just as long as a big does not fall in love with the trey, just because he can hit 'em.  We need our bigs under the bucket more than beyond the arc.  My humble opinion.  Personally, I would rather spend the summer working on his foot work and inside moves. 

Davis didn't live up to his potential out of high school due to injuries, not from trying to hit shots he shouldn't have been taking. He showed that he did have a nice mid-range game but didn't shoot a lot of those. Most of his shots still came from close. If he had been able to stay healthy and work on his game instead of rehabilitating I think he could've developed a nice 3-point shot. This would've totally changed the way other teams guarded him.

I would also point out that part of the problem with the offense this season is that there was often 3 players on the floor at the same time who can't hit a shot from more than 5 feet away. Coupled with guards who also had a hard time hitting their shots consistently, this lead to the paint getting packed. If one of the bigs had more range that would've helped alleviate this issue.

19 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

100% with you there.  During this time.... the NBA needs to get off their rear ends.... and put an end to the one and done rule..... for ever. 

Last year Adam Silver said it would likely be gone before the '22 draft.

9 minutes ago, NCHoosier32 said:

as usual, totally agree.  people always say rankings don't matter, and i get it... sometimes they are way off.  that said 35-80 ranked guys any day of the week!  politics some times play into where they get jumbled, potential, etc, etc., but it sounds like we're landing almost all of that 80-130 range right now.  sure 1 or 2 are fine, but give me at least a couple in the 15-35 range an the rest in 35-80.  no, i don't want Cal's group of all 5 star guys (or at least don't expect it!).  i agree with the other poster that said it's about how they fit together and play together, but talent does matter!   

On another site one guy posted a table he had made which broke down recruiting ranking vs success in the NBA over a recent period of 9 years. He defined success as $5M+ in NBA pay. Now, NBA success doesn't always equal NCAA success and even the $5M is an arbitrary value but he had to define it somehow. So not a perfect measure but still interesting and telling. 

The most successful group was 1-5 (by a large margin), followed by 6-10, 11-20, 21-30, 31-40 in that order. 40+ the numbers were inconsistent in the way he grouped them but were close enough that I think they can be grouped together and all were less than these other groups in front of them.

So while on an individual basis the rankings might not be accurate, overall they do a decent job of predicting success in the NBA. And I'd rather have multiple guys on the team with decent chances of having NBA careers vs a bunch that have little to no chance. The sweat spot would be guys that are ranked high but not too high so there is a good chance that they're in school 2 years, preferably 3 or even 4 years before having successful professional careers. 

32 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

Just getting in front of the screen again. Phenomenal pickup and momentum continues for Archie and IU. 6'9 Center who can use both hands and has range to 16 or so? One of the best Centers in the Midwest. 

Regarding that Nick's guy tweet....his original tweet and subsequent follow up in replies makes zero sense. He said that TK plays the 4 and LD plays 5 but they'll never play together? Seems like what Gleas said...attention grab because everyone else has said crystal ball is 100% for Trey to IU.

Great job by our staff. 

LMAO, he said that Kaufman and Duncomb won't play together? I almost made a joke right after I saw this commitment that about how they wouldn't play together. It seems every player IU lands or is recruiting Kaufman won't play with. He wouldn't play with Furst until Purdue landed Furst then it wasn't an issue. He was fine playing with Lander until Lander committed to IU and suddenly they won't play together. Now Duncomb, ignoring that they play together in AAU with no problem.

For what it's worth (not much), 2 Duke analysts predict Kaufman to IU now.

7 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I saw a couple of rankings that had him in 80-90 range

247 has him at 80. 247 composite has him just a bit above 100 (106?). Rivals has him around 140 and a 3*. I, personally, pay more attention to the composite ranking than individual site rankings. That and other offers.

2 minutes ago, Stlboiler23 said:

I’m guessing he’s a Purdue fan. 

I've thought that but I'm leaning towards UK. He's always talking as if the only way to win is with a ton of 5* recruits.

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

Now a days you have no clue who will leave early.  I saw that Richmond had 3 guys declare for the NBA

It's also easier than ever to declare for the draft and still return to school. Just because they declared it doesn't mean they're leaving. Even if they stay in and go undrafted they could return as long as they kept their eligibility regarding agents.

1 minute ago, dbmhoosier said:

Fpeaugh is of course.  He's clearly a troll or has a massive drug problem. 

I go with troll. No matter what the situation he finds a way to cast it in a negative perspective. Plus, he's called for rooting for losses.

Just now, IU Scott said:

Yeah you and Fepaugh are never wrong.  I bet he is over on rivals talking about Duncomb not being a high enough rated recruit.

He is.

7 minutes ago, 13th&Jackson said:

He looked really excited to be in those uniforms, especially WI 

That's what I thought when I saw those photos.

46 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

Hearing from a good friend of mine. Despite announcing he will be back next year.  Is exploring the idea of filing the needed papers to enter the NBA draft !

That's all I have got for now, HSN.

 

As he should. I still think he'll be back next year. Maybe the feedback he gets will help motivate him developing some range.

1 hour ago, ledies22 said:

I figured Purdue was out as soon as Furst committed. Everything i saw Kauffman and Furst didnt want to play together. Is that no longer the case?

When IU was recruiting both Kaufman and Furst they didn't want to play together. Now that Furst has committed to Purdue it is apparently no longer an issue. However, since Lander committed to IU, he is now the one Kaufman doesn't want to play with. Strange, eh? 🙄

I'd take these comments about one player not wanting to play with another with a giant grain of salt unless it comes directly from the player or someone who would definitely know (immediate family, coach, etc). These rumors likely come from disgruntled IU fans or Purdue fans.