Would You Rather?

[Danomatic]

Now this inaugural “Would You Rather?” may seem a bit rhetorical, but I’m going through with it anyway. 

Would you rather have Romeo stay a 2nd season, nobody transfer and bring in only Brooks and TJD... OR, would you rather see Romeo go directly to the NBA, lose an additional two players via transfer and bring in Brooks, TJD, Watford, Carton and Leque(sp?)??? 

Personally, I’d prefer the former, but just thought that I’d throw it out there.

[KoB2011]

The first option, although it seems unlikely we have no transfers again (essentially for the third straight year). 

[CauseThatsMyDJ]

Poor Grant Gelon, forgotten again. 

[5fouls]

I'll take Romeo for 2 years no matter what the scenario.  I would prefer Watford over Brooks though.

[IU Scott]

1 hour ago, Danomatic said:

Now this inaugural “Would You Rather?” may seem a bit rhetorical, but I’m going through with it anyway. 

Would you rather have Romeo stay a 2nd season, nobody transfer and bring in only Brooks and TJD... OR, would you rather see Romeo go directly to the NBA, lose an additional two players via transfer and bring in Brooks, TJD, Watford, Carton and Leque(sp?)??? 

Personally, I’d prefer the former, but just thought that I’d throw it out there.

I would rather see Romeo stay a second year because I would rather have more experience players than having 4 or 5 freshman playing key roles.  I like this lineup if Romeo stays a second year,

Phinissee-sophomore/ Green-senior

Romeo=sophomore/ Durham-junior

Hunter-sophomore/Brooks-freshman

Smith- Junior/Thompson-sophomore

TJD-freshman/Forrester-sophomore

[KoB2011]

4 hours ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

Poor Grant Gelon, forgotten again. 

I didnt forget him. It's why I said essentially. 

[ADegenerate]

I’ll take that second option every time. I want romeo one + done to have that ace or sleeve for recruiting. Also that’s 5 5 star players. That’s insane.

[5fouls]

12 hours ago, ADegenerate said:

I’ll take that second option every time. I want romeo one + done to have that ace or sleeve for recruiting. Also that’s 5 5 star players. That’s insane.

The Villanova model is working better than the Kentucky model right now.

[Hoosierhoopster]

I generally prefer to have veteran depth, chemistry, "institutional knowledge," with an elite player or 2 mixed in with another couple of good players that balance the class/positions.

Breaking down this choice, also depends on who we might lose via transfer (don't like to speculate there, I'm not superstitious, just a little stitious vbg)

Option 1: 2019-20 - Romeo stays as a soph, no transfers, add Brooks / Trayce (both are forwards)

Guards - Romeo, Durham, Green, Phinisee, 

Forwards/wings: Trayce, Brooks, Smith, Davis, Moore, Thompson, Forrester, Hunter, Demezi 

That's forward heavy, you can label a couple guard-forwards or true small forwards but we'd need at least 1 guard under this scenario, imo.

Option 2: 2019-20 - Romeo goes lottery, lose 2, add Brooks, Trayce, Wat - Junior, Carton, Leque 

Still on my first cup of coffee, thought I counted 12, but with 5 that's 13 so should be a complete class. 

This is actually better (leaving aside who transfers) for class depth -- Carton and Leque and guards.

Then though the question would be who did we lose? 

I'm taking the cop out approach - I'd go with something in between these choices. Need more guard depth.

[KoB2011]

6 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

I generally prefer to have veteran depth, chemistry, "institutional knowledge," with an elite player or 2 mixed in with another couple of good players that balance the class/positions.

Breaking down this choice, also depends on who we might lose via transfer (don't like to speculate there, I'm not superstitious, just a little stitious vbg)

Option 1: 2019-20 - Romeo stays as a soph, no transfers, add Brooks / Trayce (both are forwards)

Guards - Romeo, Durham, Green, Phinisee, 

Forwards/wings: Trayce, Brooks, Smith, Davis, Moore, Thompson, Forrester, Hunter, Demezi 

That's forward heavy, you can label a couple guard-forwards or true small forwards but we'd need at least 1 guard under this scenario, imo.

Option 2: 2019-20 - Romeo goes lottery, lose 2, add Brooks, Trayce, Wat - Junior, Carton, Leque 

Still on my first cup of coffee, thought I counted 12, but with 5 that's 13 so should be a complete class. 

This is actually better (leaving aside who transfers) for class depth -- Carton and Leque and guards.

Then though the question would be who did we lose? 

I'm taking the cop out approach - I'd go with something in between these choices. Need more guard depth.

I'd argue in your first scenario neither Hunter nor Anderson are 4/5 in Archie's system (and maybe Smith can play 3 by his junior year). I actually think that would be an incredibly well balanced roster. 

[5fouls]

It is highly unlikely that any freshman coming in would be better than a sophomore Romeo.  

And, under the scenario that 1-2 people transfer, it's hard to speculate on what that means for class or position balance, not knowing which class the transfers come from .

Bottom lines that we will be a better team with Romeo here as a sophomore than we will be if he's not.

 

[Hoosierhoopster]

6 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I'd argue in your first scenario neither Hunter nor Anderson are 4/5 in Archie's system (and maybe Smith can play 3 by his junior year). I actually think that would be an incredibly well balanced roster. 

Neither are guards. Agree there is versatility, but we need more guards. Both are really small forwards.

[KoB2011]

4 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Neither are guards. Agree there is versatility, but we need more guards. Both are really small forwards.

 Neither are point guards, but neither are 4. They both fit into the 2-3 position that Romeo will play, RoJo played, McRoberts plays. 

[Hoosierhoopster]

2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

 Neither are point guards, but neither are 4. They both fit into the 2-3 position that Romeo will play, RoJo played, McRoberts plays. 

If you go back up you'll see I said you could label a couple guard-forwards, but really that's kind of a stretch and -- for me -- bringing in additional forwards -- they're really small forwards -- just misbalances the class. Add at least 1 shooting guard or point, guard depth is important. Rob was never a forward.

[KoB2011]

1 minute ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

If you go back up you'll see I said you could label a couple guard-forwards, but really that's kind of a stretch and -- for me -- bringing in additional forwards -- they're really small forwards -- just misbalances the class. Add at least 1 shooting guard or point, guard depth is important. Rob was never a forward.

There is no difference in a 2 and a 3 in our system. I'll give you point guards are different, but we have three on the roster you presented. 

Rob wasnt a forward, and neither is Romeo nor is Anderson or Smith. Not in our system unless it changes going forward. 

[Hoosierhoopster]

Just now, KoB2011 said:

There is no difference in a 2 and a 3 in our system. I'll give you point guards are different, but we have three on the roster you presented. 

Rob wasnt a forward, and neither is Romeo nor is Anderson or Smith. Not in our system unless it changes going forward. 

I understand where you're coming from, but disagree generally that there's no difference. Anderson might fit the bill, at 6'6 last I saw. I think he's around a 35% 3-point shooter. Trayce is really a 4 and as far as I know not an outside shooter. Smith is not an outside shooter. 

It's about depth and the ability to stretch the floor. We all know college ball is largely a guard's game. We absolutely need rangy wings but we also absolutely need guards, point and combo, who can push the ball, play the perimeter and knock down 3's. Bottom line, why bring in additional power forwards/wings with no actual guards when we're already stacked on forwards? 

[KoB2011]

5 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

I understand where you're coming from, but disagree generally that there's no difference. Anderson might fit the bill, at 6'6 last I saw. I think he's around a 35% 3-point shooter. Trayce is really a 4 and as far as I know not an outside shooter. Smith is not an outside shooter. 

It's about depth and the ability to stretch the floor. We all know college ball is largely a guard's game. We absolutely need rangy wings but we also absolutely need guards, point and combo, who can push the ball, play the perimeter and knock down 3's. Bottom line, why bring in additional power forwards/wings with no actual guards when we're already stacked on forwards? 

Right, I don't think Smith or TJD play the same position as Romeo, Hunter, Anderson or Brooks. The latter four are perimeter players. 

What do you think the difference is in a 2 or 3 in our system? Tell me, using last year as the example so we aren't speaking hypothetically, who was a 2 and who was a 3 please. 

If you stop looking at their height and look at the skillset, the latter four all do exactly what you described us needing guards to do. 

[Seeking6]

20 hours ago, Danomatic said:

Now this inaugural “Would You Rather?” may seem a bit rhetorical, but I’m going through with it anyway. 

Would you rather have Romeo stay a 2nd season, nobody transfer and bring in only Brooks and TJD... OR, would you rather see Romeo go directly to the NBA, lose an additional two players via transfer and bring in Brooks, TJD, Watford, Carton and Leque(sp?)??? 

Personally, I’d prefer the former, but just thought that I’d throw it out there.

Easy. And it's not close. I'll take 3 5 star in state players on the same team with Green/RP at PG and Justin/Jake/Race at the 5. Not even close in my mind. We are either all in retaining the best this state has or we aren't. If we aren't...I don't ever want to hear one more complaint from an IU fan talking about not getting our states best talent.

[BGleas]

1 hour ago, KoB2011 said:

Right, I don't think Smith or TJD play the same position as Romeo, Hunter, Anderson or Brooks. The latter four are perimeter players. 

What do you think the difference is in a 2 or 3 in our system? Tell me, using last year as the example so we aren't speaking hypothetically, who was a 2 and who was a 3 please. 

If you stop looking at their height and look at the skillset, the latter four all do exactly what you described us needing guards to do. 

Agree with what you’re saying. For labeling purposes I would say there are guards, wings and forwards. Green, Phinisee, Durham are guards. Langford is sort of a wing/guard. McRoberts, Anderson, and Hunter are wings. Smith, Morgan, Fitzner, Thompson, Moore, Davis and Forrester are forwards. 

[ADegenerate]

3 hours ago, 5fouls said:

The Villanova model is working better than the Kentucky model right now.

That’s not the Kentucky model though. For my scenerio to play out (which is almost impossible btw) then Romeo is good enough to leave already, some of them want to transfer, and we’d have to land all of those players. The Kentucky model is getting players that want to be one and done for sure. Watford, trayce, + carton would be multi year players and Brooks + Lecque would need to play at a lottery or close to it level so 3/5 are coming back.

that seems like a perfect balance between UK/nova if you ask me. Why not have a better system and create kind of a hybrid of both. It’s like an improved version of UNCs which is damn near my dream scenerio for how the program is ran.

[Zuckerkorn]

I'd definitely opt for the option that gives us a sophomore Romeo.  As good as we expect he'll be this coming season, you'd have to believe he'd be even better with a year of experience and maturity.

[IU Scott]

Another thing I want is continuity in our roster and I want players who are here for more than one year.  I want a team who stays together and can build a chemistry together and to me that leads to a better team.

[jblaz13]

35 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Another thing I want is continuity in our roster and I want players who are here for more than one year.  I want a team who stays together and can build a chemistry together and to me that leads to a better team.

If a player is labelled NBA-Lottery ready a coach needs to put them in the NBA . Period. Romeo staying a second year only looks as good as the team ends up being this season. If IU is a Final 4 team, it actually might enhance his stock staying to finish the job. If he underperforms , while perhaps disappointing , it would give us an even better version of him as a Soph. 

Normally I say I prefer more years anytime, but since Archie has never coached a recruit as prestigious as Langford before, he needs to establish what he is capable of when he has a player regarded as elite.

I'm going to stay on the fence until there is any sample size to go off of. That needs to be established this season. 

 

Edit : I want to add something else. Romeo and IU having a great  year might be a best case leading to a worst case for the roster at guard.Green has shown flashes of high volume and displayed creativity. If he becomes consistent as a Junior and has the luxury of 1 on 1 defenses due to Romeo, Juwan and others he might be bound for the draft as well. Just putting that out there. too  since it starts to factor into playing time that may or may not be around by then. 

 

[Hoosierhoopster]

On 5/20/2018 at 9:30 AM, KoB2011 said:

Right, I don't think Smith or TJD play the same position as Romeo, Hunter, Anderson or Brooks. The latter four are perimeter players. 

What do you think the difference is in a 2 or 3 in our system? Tell me, using last year as the example so we aren't speaking hypothetically, who was a 2 and who was a 3 please. 

If you stop looking at their height and look at the skillset, the latter four all do exactly what you described us needing guards to do. 

I think somehow we start talking past each other. I've been talking about the skill sets of guards/combo-guards and have never said a 2 is starkly different from a 3 -- at least in a system (e.g., whether your favorite player of all time, PG (!), is playing the 2 or 3 is really only about what side of the floor he's on).

It's about whether we have enough guard depth under the OP's suggested alternatives, for guards who can handle the ball, bring it up the floor, and hit from the arc with regularity (e.g., back to Rob, he was never in any way a forward, he was a combo guard). 

I do not have a great feel for the incoming forwards' games overall, and how they will be utilized at IU -- that's a good question here. But talking about just Brooks and Trayce, as they are the 2 suggested additions keeping Romeo, Trayce is like 6'9, ESPN's scouting reports talks about him as a skilled 4 who can play on the block but also stretch defenses. (Loved his pops btw.) Other scouting services consider him a PF, also a 4, not a 3. He can shoot, but it doesn't sound like he'll be bringing the ball up, roaming the perimeter, setting up the offense, etc. Brooks looks like a really good SF/3 with a strong mid-range game, I'm not sure about his outside game. Would he play like a guard at IU? Does he have a good handle and perimeter game? 

[KoB2011]

12 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

I think somehow we start talking past each other. I've been talking about the skill sets of guards/combo-guards and have never said a 2 is starkly different from a 3 -- at least in a system (e.g., whether your favorite player of all time, PG (!), is playing the 2 or 3 is really only about what side of the floor he's on).

It's about whether we have enough guard depth under the OP's suggested alternatives, for guards who can handle the ball, bring it up the floor, and hit from the arc with regularity (e.g., back to Rob, he was never in any way a forward, he was a combo guard). 

I do not have a great feel for the incoming forwards' games overall, and how they will be utilized at IU -- that's a good question here. But talking about just Brooks and Trayce, as they are the 2 suggested additions keeping Romeo, Trayce is like 6'9, ESPN's scouting reports talks about him as a skilled 4 who can play on the block but also stretch defenses. (Loved his pops btw.) Other scouting services consider him a PF, also a 4, not a 3. He can shoot, but it doesn't sound like he'll be bringing the ball up, roaming the perimeter, setting up the offense, etc. Brooks looks like a really good SF/3 with a strong mid-range game, I'm not sure about his outside game. Would he play like a guard at IU? Does he have a good handle and perimeter game? 

My limited take on Brooks is his game offensively is similar to PGs offensively.