5fouls

Somebody pull a damn fire alarm!!!!!

Well, this frees up the weekend.

2 minutes ago, Kdug said:

How was that not a hook and hold and tomenaga? Seemed blatant and Leal was even asking for a review.

If someone asked the ref to check for hook and hold on X or Reneau, it gets reviewed.

Missing Galloway tonight.

Missing Galloway tonight.

1 minute ago, IUFLA said:

Coach called him "Tominaga" in his pregame with Rick Pizzo...

I kinda liked "The Little Guard"

🙂

Sounded like he said Tominagey to me.  But, it's the thought that counted.  

4 hours ago, IU Scott said:

In my opinion I think the key to the game is to score more points than Nebraska. If this happens then I think we have a good shot to win.

Not sure the NET agrees with you.  We might win, but if Nebraska is more efficient in losing.........

Spent 4-5 hours trying to get someone other than Giolito for the Angels/Sox square.  Was surprised Lincecum was so high.

3 hours ago, Kdug said:

Again, I think there’s a substantial gap in overall efficiency (which is what the NET is) between MSU and IU. 70 spots doesn’t seem all that off from what I’d expect when looking at the results. Pure wins and losses we’re closer to MSU, but even then MSU has wins over some top tier teams like Baylor and Illinois, while IU’s best win is probably vs MSU or Wisconsin (and basically nothing after those 2), who are mid to lower seeded teams. There’s also a reason MSU is in the bubble conversation, and that’s because their resume isn’t as strong as their efficiency numbers. IU is very weak in both areas.

And I don’t know that citing IU’s losses to top teams - almost all of which we got blown out in - is a good argument for us being in or close to being in. Who cares if you played good teams if you can’t compete with them. If anything that shows that we can’t compete consistently with good competition.

By the very same metrics you are defending, before today's games MSU's Quad 1 record was the same as IU and their Quad 2 record was worse.  So, I'm not sure where you are coming up with the idea that they have 'better' wins than us. 

This all comes down to them beating Directional U by 25 in November and us beating them by 9.  

That may be how it's designed, but that's not the way it should be.

11 minutes ago, 94hoosier said:

1-7 quad 1

9-0 quad 2

net 6

Yeah, but they were really impressive when they beat Directional State Community College by 32 points on November 1st

2 hours ago, Kdug said:

Ageeed, you don’t ignore the last 3 weeks either. Which is why I said we’ve played like a tourney caliber team during that stretch. But that’s only 5 games out of the 32 we’ve played. You can’t just ignore the other 27 games, or 85% of the season, of mostly mediocre to bad basketball. If we would’ve played like this most of the season, we would be in the tourney. Unfortunately we didn’t, and we dug a hole too deep both in terms of wins and losses and efficiency metrics.

I’d bet most of the top 100 teams have a stretch of games where they’ve looked tourney caliber. But it’s about doing that consistently throughout the year, not just the last 5 games of the year.

MSU lost today.  If IU wins today and tomorrow, but loses to Purdue on Sunday, who should get the 6th B1G bid?

37 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

You can complain and moan about this all you want.  They have more +15 point wins and less +15 point losses than we do compared to the wins/losses.  It's really not hard to figure out the metrics behind what the NET is doing.  Kill the 300+ team you play and don't get your ass handed to you very often by anyone else, then + wins enough to stay in the top 50 and you're pretty golden.  We had way too many mid/low single digit wins against shitty teams early and then gave up to many 15+ losses over the season.  We also win close alot of games.  How many low single digit games do we win by.  No one cares if you win by 1 if you're undefeated or close to it.  But a 18 to 20 win season, you can't win a majority of your games by single digits.  You're going to be considered mediocre.  

They have to use something to differentiate the team with similar Quad wins/losses.  What else are they going to look at?  Paint vs 3point scoring?  Rebounds? Efficiency maybe?

All this is coming from me, who knows nothing about anything, so take what i say and ignore it

Teams evolve over the course of the year.  Putting so much weight on Margin of Victory in November while discounting a head to head matchup last week is stupid.

1 hour ago, Kdug said:

Might be unpopular, but I agree with the NET, kenpom, and other advanced metrics assessment of this IU team. For 75% of the year, we played like one of the worst big ten teams, and really one of the 10-15 worst power conference teams. This last stretch we’ve played tourney caliber basketball, but you can’t ignore the first 3.5 months of the season. Even with this stretch, we’ve still probably only beat 2 at large tournament teams the whole year.

Better late than never, but this improvement in play needed to happen at least a month earlier if we wanted any shot at an at large bid.

It's not neceassarily where we are ranked, but where we are ranked in relation to our peers from the Big Ten.  You say we cant ignore the first 3.5 months.  I say you cant ignore the last 3 weeks either.

A win over MSU in Sunday should mean more than struggling against Army in November.  It just does.  

How 'bout that Transfer Portal

2 minutes ago, IUCrazy2 said:

Just don't let Tominaga beat us tonight.

Is he the little guard?  

You cant make this shiat up.

We have the same overall record as MSU

We have the same Quad 1 record as MSU.

We have a better Quad 2 record than MSU.

We own a head to head win over MSU.

We are 70 spots behind MSU in the NET.

2 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

You mean against OSU

We better hope it's Illinois.  We beat Illinois and lose a close one to Purdue and we MIGHT get in.  We beat OSU and lose a close one to Purdue and we don't get in.  We need that signature win.

Sometimes one play outshines the rest of the 39 minutes and 55 seconds.  Leal

1 minute ago, Coach Robby said:

Sorry to interrupt the game thread, this is a discussion for tomorrow…what % of fans over 40 are on blood pressure meds? I don’t want to break hippa laws but I think it’s a topic to discuss…

You name it, I take it  

3 minutes ago, SawatchHoosier said:

Fouls everywhere..

Nope.  There's just one of me.

On 3/13/2024 at 3:00 PM, btownqb said:

I truly would not be able to focus on my work if Laura Rutledge was the co-host and I was Louis Riddick, Shefter, or Dan Orlvosky. 

For real... she's too good-looking. 

And she wouldn't be able to focus on her work because of all your drooling and panting 

We win.  I'm a TRUE believer.

14 hours ago, JW75 said:

Tom Crean is a good tv analyst.

1000% agree.  He does a great job in the studio.  Dont think I've heard him call a game though.