tdhoosier

27 minutes ago, Purdue7 said:

Lots of IU ❤️ 

Last 5 minutes is IU talk if anybody is interested. I think a few leaps are made, but entertaining none the less. The shocker out of that clip: apparently between Ballo, Rice and Carlyle the NIL spend is $3.3 million. Don't know how true that figure is, but that's what he claims. 

16 minutes ago, HoosierDPU95 said:

Having no access to newspaper for many years now, I've found this stuff with paper towels works wonders

 

That's that foaming stuff. It's the bee's knees. 

1 minute ago, Hoosier987 said:

Differing opinions but I think if Leal is playing 15mpg then we didn’t address our shooting needs. Regardless, I think Woodson addresses the issue. 

I love that Leal had some good games last year. There was a lot of ‘I told you so’ after those games. BUT, my concern before the year started was not necessarily whether he could or couldn’t contribute. I thought IF we truly needed his minutes (which we did), then we were going to be in deep doo doo. That it probably would mean that CJ Gunn and Banks didn’t develop the way we hoped.

And that’s what happened. 

If Leal gets 15 mpg next year, something has gone wrong and we are probably a bubble team at best. 

47 minutes ago, HoosierDPU95 said:

This probably should go in a different thread but I'm not sure which one. The term "shooter" has come up a lot in this thread though so I'll post here. What are folks thinking with statements like "he's not a shooter" or "we need shooters"?

Are folks wanting/expecting someone like Hulls where the player has one job and that is to knock down 3's at a +40% with defense, rebounding, driving the ball, etc. being optional?

or

Are folks wanting/expecting someone like Mark Sears that shoots +50% from the field +40% from 3, +80% from the line and can also kill you off the dribble, play D and rebound?

or

Are folks wanting/expecting something in between?

I'm not making a case one way or the other for what "shooter" should mean here, I'm just trying to understand what other's are wanting/expecting.

I'm not diminishing the need for athletic guards who can create a shot for themselves and drive. Let's get these guys. If they can hit at a good rate from 3....even better. 

BUT if we have Ballo/Malik in the paint drawing doubles, not getting a high 30%/low 40% 3 point shooter (or two) to burn opponents for double teaming us in the paint will be a disappointment, IMO. I'm not saying this player(s) needs to be a starter, but one who is a capable defender and can give us quality minutes if our offense stalls. I love the idea of Hickman and Conwell. 

4 minutes ago, btownqb said:

Sarcastic about what? 

lots of myths here... but I still don't see the correlation to that and the thinking Carlyle will start over TG. He, by in large, plays the correct people. He just doesn't always do himself justice in the off-season, by leaving glaring holes open, and not giving himself enough options. 

Either way-- I don't see parallels between some of these "examples" in regards to who would start between TG/Carlyle. 

Sarcastic about the fans thinking one thing and Woody doing something different.

But that is my point exactly. Myths are perpetrated by fans....like penciling in Carlyle over Gallo. Some things seem to make sense in the moment. 

From a defensive perspective, do you honestly see Woody having Mgbako (the weakest defender in our starting line up last year) and 2 players new to his system on the court at the same time? When a 5th year senior is on the bench? 

Many people (I wasn't one of them) thought Kopp should've had less minutes because of his lack of offensive production, but Woody gave him a lot of minutes because he was a veteran and a great systematic defender. 

And who knows if Carlyle is even coming here. No knock on him, but he has a pretty similar skill set as Rice. IF he does come here, I'd have to imagine it'd be under the assumption that he may not start this year, but will be a major piece moving forward. 

5 minutes ago, btownqb said:

What examples do we have of the bold? 

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic. 

Uhhhh, from what the fans expect:

"we need to shoot more 3's"
"MM needs to play the 4"
"Malik needs to play the 5"
"We need to play 4 in 1 out"
"XJ should start" "XJ should not start" XJ needs to be kicked off the team" lol
"Malik and Sparks should not be on the floor at the same time" 
"Malik and Ware should not spend a majority of the time on the floor together"
"Race isn't a starter"
"Kopps isn't a starter"

....I could go on. 

8 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

If I'm not mistaken, the rumor was when Galloway pledged his support to Woody, he also said he'd be open to a bench role...At least that's the rumor I remember...

Not saying Gallo wouldn't be open to a bench role. Not saying Carlyle doesn't have the potential to be a star. 

We just have history on how Woody coaches and how he uses his personnel. Every time we expect him to deviate from this, he doesn't.

6 minutes ago, DC2345 said:

Carlyle has star potential and Galloway doesn't.

I'll bet you $1 Gallo starts more games than Carlyle (if he commits). 

I'm surprised at how many people have Carlyle penciled into the starting line up. This is not to say that i don't think he's a good player or I don't want him. I do. He has 3 years of eligibility. 

BUT knowing who is coaching this team, unless Carlyle lights the world on fire (on both end of the court), I just don't think there is any way he's starting over Gallo.

Guys, this is Woody. The man who values defense and veterans on the floor. The only exception to this rule was Mgbako and that's because the guys behind him on the depth chart were equally as bad at defense. 

I also think Gallo is very underestimated by some. He was asked to do WAY too much last year. Sandwich him in between Rice and a sophomore Mgbako and he's going to thrive. 

Our 1-3 is not going to be a below average defender in Mgbako and 2 brand new guards who have zero games of experience in this defensive system. I'll eat crow if I'm wrong, but I won't be wrong on this one. 😄

11 hours ago, 5fouls said:

I was thinking about @Lostin76 today and realized I had not seen him on the board in a long time.  He was a regular in this thread.  His profile says he has not been on the board since 4/18/23.  So, this was one of his last posts. That concerns me a bit 

And, while we're on the subject of people I have not seen on in a while, @mrflynn has not been on since early March.  Hope everything is alright there.   

I’ve been wondering where he’s been as well (when it comes to posting on HSN). I’m friends with him on Instagram though and he appears to be doing well - traveling and enjoying his dogs in Brooklyn. 

28 minutes ago, btownqb said:

I don't think Malik is a "low post" offense guy, I think there are multiple facets to his game, especially moving forward.. Ballo doesn't get his points in the same way that Ware did. I also only see those two playing 30mpg tops.. still ways to have multiple lineups throughout the game. 

Conwell, playing in the MVC, is more proven than Rice, the Pac 12 FR of the year? Ehhh. 

Furthermore, Carlyle's FR numbers, against significantly better competition dwarfed Conwell's FR numbers. 

Maybe, I'm misunderstanding, but Malik scored a vast majority of his points last year in the low post. Yes, he can step out and hit a 3 once in a while, but I don't get why you don't think he's not a low post guy. 

You're right that Ballo doesn't get points like Ware. Ware spreads the floor a bit more and can play facing the basket.

To me, Malik and Ballo are 2 back to the basket low post guys. Yes, we potentially will improve our backcourt, but once again,  how are we not limiting the guards effectiveness if the lane is too packed to drive? Just like JHS, they're going to have to create for themselves with low percentage 2's and make those open 3's. BUT without the threat to drive, the defenders can play up in their face and go over screens, thus, making those low percentage shots even harder. (lowering the percentage of low percentage shots....haha). Although JHS could drive the ball, he wasn't really effective at doing it with TJD and Race on the court at the same time. And arguably, TJD and Race spread the floor just as much as Ballo and Malik would. 

I like how we are trying to talk ourselves into believing versatile athletic guards that aren't great 3 point shooters can make a huge difference, - that more ball movement and spacing will somehow materialize, but if we are going to jam the lane once again with 2 back to the basket post players, we need high percentage catch and shoot guys. That's how PU does it. That's how UConn does it. If we don't, then for the 4th year in a row our opponents will simply just pack the paint and dare us to shoot the 3. 

What am I missing here? 

1 hour ago, jv1972iu said:

That would be a nice story.  But I don’t think it’s going to happen.  At 4 over, he’s going to have to shoot a really good score today to make the cut.  I hope he does, but I doubt he has it in him.

Well, I obviously made that bad prediction while he was on the second hole. haha. +4 is going to be a bit too hard to overcome. Now I'll be rooting for Rory to complete the grand slam....and root against LIV golfers. 

3 minutes ago, IUProfessor said:

In my mind, that's what a starting lineup of Rice-Carlyle-Mgbako-Reneau-Ballo would represent.

Just to be clear, I think Rice is a great target, and expect that he will improve his 3 point shooting in time. I don't see Carlyle as a great fit with this roster, especially at the expense of a great all-around talent like Conwell. Ballo is a pass for me, I don't think he and Reneau will pair well together for a coherent, high level offense.

I agree. But they made the point on Assembly Call last night that Woody has a philosophy of playing 2 bigs at the same time. He's obviously looking for a starting caliber big in the portal, so it's pretty clear he's not going to stray from that philosophy anytime soon. And if 'Woody is going to continue to Woody', then you might as well go get the best big you can find. 

He's not going to change his style, i've just surrendered to that belief. 

1 minute ago, iuswingman said:

how are Rice and Carlyle with on the ball defense?

Our defense stunk it up when Xavier wasn't playing or wasn't getting after it.   We are just as a sparse on players that can pressure the ball as we are with outside shooting.

I alluded to this clip above. This highlights Rice in the Stanford game, but watch Carlyle on defense. 

1 hour ago, DC2345 said:

1. Rice, Galloway, Cupps

2. Carlyle, Hickman, Newton

3. Mgbako, Tucker

4. Reneau, TBD

5. Ballo, TBD

In this hypothetical world, I don't think there's any way that Carlyle is going to start over Gallo. I think the appeal of Carlyle is his upside and that he has 3 years of eligibility left. 

@dgambill posted that clip of Rice lighting up Stanford two pages back. Watch who was defending him a majority of the time - Carlyle looked like a matador. 

12 minutes ago, BobSaccamanno said:

I’ve got confidence that Dolson will have a more proactive approach and won’t get caught with his pants down.  Get the money lined up to go big and have back channel discussions with plans laid out on a series of targets.  He’s got time to get this right.  

What makes it great is that is sounds like both got caught with their pants down. The Trilly narrative on it was UK was looking for a way out of the relationship. Cal talked to Arkansas which was violated his contract and the AD essentially said leave or we’ll sue you. I think they were prepared to be bleed a little to get out from under that rock. 

So it sounds like UK got what it wanted, but wasn’t prepared because in their defense the timing was bad (the coaching dominos have almost all fallen this year). As somebody who strongly dislikes both Cal and UK, I’m just eating popcorn.

That said, Pope can potentially be a good coach, but will he be able to build rosters?

1 hour ago, dgambill said:

just to remind everyone who we are in on….and also remind them how awful defense is in the PAC 12.

That also reminded me how Bill Walton talks about meaningless BS instead of the game he’s supposed to be analyzing. 

29 minutes ago, Indykev said:

 

Is this real?

22 hours ago, Seeking6 said:

The greatest 4 days in golf is upon us! Plenty of storylines coming as always. First the weather on Thursday. 1.5 inches of rain and gusts up to 40 or so. I expect a ton of higher pin placements which invites tons of problems.

If the rain causes delays the late guys will catch a break except for Tiger. Not sure if walking Augusta National for 27 holes on Friday is ideal.

Hard to go against Scottie right now....but I feel like Brooks and Rahm here the noise and want to silent folks.

I've hit my limit of entries on Fanduel....but core groups of Scottie, Brooks, Rahm....along with Cam Young/Smith, Henley, McCarthy and of course top 15 machine at Augusta Si Woo Kim.

Can't win it on Thursday but you sure can lose it. Interesting to see who embraces the conditions and just fights for Even.

My gut says it's the year for Rickie. 

1 hour ago, 13th&Jackson said:

Checked in on Rupp Rafters. A sizable contingent is whining that KY may end up "settling" for Scott Drew (I'd be shocked if he took that job). What a delusional group. I'd bring Drew from Waco to Bloomington in a pedi-cab if that's what it took. 

I am interested to see what happens. 

We have used the excuse that blue blood pressure cookers may not be as attractive as we once thought with all the big TV money rolling into the B1G and SEC. Monetarily, a good chunk of schools can hold on to their over achieving coaches with contract extensions and offer similar $$$ to proven coaching candidates. And now, without all that money flowing under the table to players, all of the sudden, things got much for competitive for UK. 

Can they pull in a big name or are they going to be denied by a string of candidates? 

This UCONN team is ridiculously good. Every game, everything is so easy for them. Amazing movement and they just wear opponents down….then knock them out.  

Edey just having a really bad half. 

45 minutes ago, ForHumanity said:

It was absolutely a foul!

In real time I thought it was a bad call and I think the broadcast only showed the replay once. BUT once I got a chance to see the ‘zoomed in’ replays, I agree, good call. The screener was moving the entire time. It was too blatant for the refs to swallow their whistles on….I don’t care how much time was left. 

33 minutes ago, Drroogh said:

Could be word is out, ‘don’t tell that HSN stalker anything’

@Indykev, can you change your pic to this?

I said it earlier in another thread, but I’d like to have success similar to the women’s program.