Jackson State Post Game Thread

[btownqb]

Just now, IU Scott said:

In his example of the 81 team there was a huge drop off from our starters to the bench guys. For the most part RMK played 6 or 7 guys that year especially in the tournament. In the tournament the only times he subbed was if a guy got his 3rd foul in the first half.

So.. the only thing these two teams have in common are... the fact they're both basketball teams at Indiana University? Because that doesn't describe our current team, at all. 

[IU Scott]

3 minutes ago, btownqb said:

So.. the only thing these two teams have in common are... the fact they're both basketball teams at Indiana University? Because that doesn't describe our current team, at all. 

There is less of a drop off between starters and the bench this year compared to the that team. The major difference is the starters in 1981 is far superior to the starters this year.

[btownqb]

5 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

There is less of a drop off between starters and the bench this year compared to the that team. The major difference is the starters in 1981 is far superior to the starters this year.

Perfect. Play 9 guys. That's the best version of us. 👍

[IU Scott]

7 minutes ago, btownqb said:

Perfect. Play 9 guys. That's the best version of us. 👍

With this roster I have no problem playing 9 but last year I didn't like it when we played 9 or 10 guys. To much of a drop off last year to have 4 starters on the bench at the same time.

Back to his 81 example would you want IT, Wittman, Tolbert, Turner and Kitchell on the bench for long periods of time. Each of RMK 3 championships at least 3 starters played 30+ minutes a game. Alford played 37 minutes per game in 87 and he was in great shape.

Edited November 26, 2022 by IU Scott

[5fouls]

27 minutes ago, btownqb said:

 

But.. in all honesty.. the only one that's a candidate for being dropped from the rotation is JG. All the others have to play. We aren't running 7. 

 

JG is not in danger from being dropped from the rotation.  He's playing too well.  Injuries (like we've seen with Trayce and Galloway) will help the top 9 guys maintain a level of minutes to be considered to be in the 'rotation'.  

[5fouls]

'92/'93 minutes distribution.  Skewed a little by Pat Graham's injury.  But, there are some quality upperclassmen playing less than 30 minutes a game.  And, the Big Ten's all-time leading scorer didn't need to play 35+ minutes on a GREAT college basketball team.   

[cthomas]

20 minutes ago, btownqb said:

So.. the only thing these two teams have in common are... the fact they're both basketball teams at Indiana University? Because that doesn't describe our current team, at all. 

I'm not sure you understood what I was saying. I have no problem using this bench if it gives us an advantage. Against really good teams it may not. I'm just saying that there are different ways to win. To me, It usually comes down to having your best players on the court as much as possible. Coach Knight, love him or hate him, used the bench when someone wasn't doing what he wanted or when someone was in foul trouble most of the time. I like our bench this year a lot. If they continue to develop and can produce against better teams, by all means use them. 

[btownqb]

7 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

JG is not in danger from being dropped from the rotation.  He's playing too well.  Injuries (like we've seen with Trayce and Galloway) will help the top 9 guys maintain a level of minutes to be considered to be in the 'rotation'.  

I didn't say he was in danger. I said he was the only one that was "droppable". 

If Bates and JG continue to play well when we are fully healthy, they will be 12mpg+. 9 guys, not just getting mins because of injuries. 

[btownqb]

2 minutes ago, cthomas said:

I'm not sure you understood what I was saying. I have no problem using this bench if it gives us an advantage. Against really good teams it may not. I'm just saying that there are different ways to win. To me, It usually comes down to having your best players on the court as much as possible. Coach Knight, love him or hate him, used the bench when someone wasn't doing what he wanted or when someone was in foul trouble most of the time. I like our bench this year a lot. If they continue to develop and can produce against better teams, by all means use them. 

So play 9 guys when they are playing well and shorten the bench some, just like we did vs XU, when they arent!? Love it. I mean, that's absolutely what we did that evening. 

[IU Scott]

6 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

'92/'93 minutes distribution.  Skewed a little by Pat Graham's injury.  But, there are some quality upperclassmen playing less than 30 minutes a game.  And, the Big Ten's all-time leading scorer didn't need to play 35+ minutes on a GREAT college basketball team.   

The 92 final four team only played 8 guys and only dressed 10 players. Leary and Lindeman mainly played in mop up roles. Evans,Graham and Knight was being redshirted.

[Seeking6]

1 hour ago, IUFLA said:

Armond Hill... Director of Basketball Administration 

Our consigliere.

[5fouls]

1 minute ago, IU Scott said:

The 92 final four team only played 8 guys and only dressed 10 players. Leary and Lindeman mainly played in mop up roles. Evans,Graham and Knight was being redshirted.

The '93 team was better than the '92 team.  The point is you can be a very successful team with a 9-man rotation as long as all 9 are being productive.  I personally think all 9 of our rotation guys deserve 12+ minutes a game. And, that's not even including Gunn, Banks, and Duncomb, who have all played well at times when given the opportunity. 

Bottom line is that you don't not give Galloway or Geronimo minutes in a quest to get anyone other than TJD or XJ more.  There's just not a big enough drop-off in production to justify doing that.   

[IU Scott]

37 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

The '93 team was better than the '92 team.  The point is you can be a very successful team with a 9-man rotation as long as all 9 are being productive.  I personally think all 9 of our rotation guys deserve 12+ minutes a game. And, that's not even including Gunn, Banks, and Duncomb, who have all played well at times when given the opportunity. 

Bottom line is that you don't not give Galloway or Geronimo minutes in a quest to get anyone other than TJD or XJ more.  There's just not a big enough drop-off in production to justify doing that.   

I thought the 92 team was better with Anderson and Meeks coming off the bench in the tournament. The 93 team lacked one more big and after Henderson injury it showed.

[Drroogh]

I find it entertaining when people keep comparing this team to last year’s, or CAM’s or the 92 team or the 76 team? Face it people, this is this year’s team! Enjoy it!

[IU Scott]

Just now, Drroogh said:

I find it entertaining when people keep comparing this team to last year’s, or CAM’s or the 92 team or the 76 team? Face it people, this is this year’s team! Enjoy it!

Not comparing the teams of the past but talking about how deep to go in the bench.

[SawatchHoosier]

29 minutes ago, Drroogh said:

I find it entertaining when people keep comparing this team to last year’s, or CAM’s or the 92 team or the 76 team? Face it people, this is this year’s team! Enjoy it!

Yeah but how would this team fair against the 1956 Harlem Globetrotters? 

[KoB2011]

7 hours ago, Seeking6 said:

Really hoping that's the Tamar that TJD and others have talked about. Kid was locked/confident. We add that off the bench wrinkle to this operation?? Good times coming for us all. 

Obviously Tamar has to show he can consistently be that type of player off of the bench, but if he can...

It's possible we'd have two guys in Malik and Tamar coming off of our bench that would start for literally every other team in the conference. They're both 5 star guys so it isn't exactly crazy, other than the fact that we're so good we have two five stars coming off of the bench. 

[KoB2011]

2 hours ago, 5fouls said:

JG is not in danger from being dropped from the rotation.  He's playing too well.  Injuries (like we've seen with Trayce and Galloway) will help the top 9 guys maintain a level of minutes to be considered to be in the 'rotation'.  

Eh I don't agree and it has little to do with JG, but we saw what can happen in the Xavier game. TJD is going to play ~35 minutes in big games, which means if you give Race and Malik ~22-23 each there is literally nothing there for Geronimo. 

Obviously that won't play out exactly like that, and certainly more games than not JG is going to get 15-20, but it won't shock me at all if in a lot of our big games JG gets his first sub in and unless he does something we can't keep off of the floor that's all he gets. He just has 3 really good players in front of him and we only have 80 minutes to distribute between 4 guys. 

[IUFLA]

Mo Williams post game... 

"I know the signs of a top 10 team, and I just played against one." 

[IUFLA]

What is it about our team and the 6:30-5 minute mark in the first half? 

Bates layup, Bates dunk, Banks steal and dunk, Bates corner 3...

Happened last game too..

.

[btownqb]

16 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

What is it about our team and the 6:30-5 minute mark in the first half? 

Bates layup, Bates dunk, Banks steal and dunk, Bates corner 3...

Happened last game too..

.

We find lapses in other teams depth/attention to detail and take advantage. 

[5fouls]

16 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

What is it about our team and the 6:30-5 minute mark in the first half? 

Bates layup, Bates dunk, Banks steal and dunk, Bates corner 3...

Happened last game too..

.

In that exact order?  

[btownqb]

14 hours ago, IU Scott said:

With this roster I have no problem playing 9 but last year I didn't like it when we played 9 or 10 guys. To much of a drop off last year to have 4 starters on the bench at the same time.

Back to his 81 example would you want IT, Wittman, Tolbert, Turner and Kitchell on the bench for long periods of time. Each of RMK 3 championships at least 3 starters played 30+ minutes a game. Alford played 37 minutes per game in 87 and he was in great shape.

CMW disagreed. Your example of a championship team vs last year doesn't hold any weight for me. They aren't really comparable. 

Edited November 26, 2022 by btownqb

[btownqb]

12 hours ago, Drroogh said:

I find it entertaining when people keep comparing this team to last year’s, or CAM’s or the 92 team or the 76 team? Face it people, this is this year’s team! Enjoy it!

It's probably the most annoying part about posting here. 

Actually, maybe the only annoying part. 

[btownqb]

12 hours ago, IU Scott said:

Not comparing the teams of the past but talking about how deep to go in the bench.

All you guys do is compare them to 76, 81, 92.. yes you do. It's archaic. 

What we did in those years is irrelevant. Hell what we did last year? Irrelevant.