Jump to content

At What Point......


5fouls

Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Because a teams talent isn’t just an average of its recruiting rankings. At its core, basketball is a game of size, speed, length, athleticism, and skill, and this current team is currently very poorly constructed. We have no size and length, aren’t particularly athletic, fast or quick, etc. , and aren’t particularly skilled other than Morgan and maybe Davis. 

The recruits coming in begin the foundation of a new regime/style. I don’t think next years class all of the sudden makes IU considerably better out of the gate, but it begins an era where we’re adding size, length and athleticism at positions we haven’t had that. Instead of wings that are 6’2”, we’re going to have guys that are 6’6” and taller with length and athleticism. 

Instead of a bunch of combo guards trying to play point guard, we’ll have an actual point guard. Forrester brings length and athleticism at the 4, which we haven’t had. 

Its pretty clear Crean wasn’t building rosters, he was recruiting players. That’s why there were several years where the roster had glaring issues (no shooting, no interior players, etc.). It’s really early with Archie, but next years class not only brings in good players, but players that seem to address what we need. Anderson is a really good shooter, both Andre and Hunter bring size, length and athlticism on the wing, Phinissee finally brings a true point, and Forrester brings length and athleticism at the 4. 

Good post. We also forget about Race Thompson practicing with the team each day and learning the system already...what a head start for that young man. I know he is not officially part of the 2018 class, but in essence he is and Archie's first recruit. That kid has got a pretty mature body already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply
6 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Because a teams talent isn’t just an average of its recruiting rankings. At its core, basketball is a game of size, speed, length, athleticism, and skill, and this current team is currently very poorly constructed. We have no size and length, aren’t particularly athletic, fast or quick, etc. , and aren’t particularly skilled other than Morgan and maybe Davis. 

The recruits coming in begin the foundation of a new regime/style. I don’t think next years class all of the sudden makes IU considerably better out of the gate, but it begins an era where we’re adding size, length and athleticism at positions we haven’t had that. Instead of wings that are 6’2”, we’re going to have guys that are 6’6” and taller with length and athleticism. 

Instead of a bunch of combo guards trying to play point guard, we’ll have an actual point guard. Forrester brings length and athleticism at the 4, which we haven’t had. 

Its pretty clear Crean wasn’t building rosters, he was recruiting players. That’s why there were several years where the roster had glaring issues (no shooting, no interior players, etc.). It’s really early with Archie, but next years class not only brings in good players, but players that seem to address what we need. Anderson is a really good shooter, both Andre and Hunter bring size, length and athlticism on the wing, Phinissee finally brings a true point, and Forrester brings length and athleticism at the 4. 

I don't disagree with any of this, except maybe the first paragraph. But I think roster construction is a separate issue from talent.

Mostly I'm just tired of people talking about the current roster like it's one of Crean's early teams. Archie gets plenty of time to implement his system and turn it around, but I think we should be better than we are right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Montana Hoosier said:

Nope, kids care about one thing and one thing only, playing time, some would say proximity to home as well, but that doesn’t hold much water anymore either. 5 star recruits go to where they know they will get big minutes. We can keep kidding ourselves and say it’s the coach or the history of the program, but that doesn’t matter one bit to the recruits. 

Then how does Calipari and Williams and all these guys get 5* stars to come play with their other 5* and not play as much due to so many?? Kids want time but Kids also want a coach that knows what they are doing because they know the coaches that will know what they are doing will get them to win games and get them in the lime light and make them better! Not always about playing time because of so they would go to East Missippi and just play whenever they wanted and score 50 pts/game against trash teams

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Shooter said:

I don't disagree with any of this, except maybe the first paragraph. But I think roster construction is a separate issue from talent.

Mostly I'm just tired of people talking about the current roster like it's one of Crean's early teams. Archie gets plenty of time to implement his system and turn it around, but I think we should be better than we are right now.

An NIT team lost its three best players. We are lucky to be this competitive. Outside of the ISU game, this team has been as could be expected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Shooter said:

I don't disagree with any of this, except maybe the first paragraph. But I think roster construction is a separate issue from talent.

Mostly I'm just tired of people talking about the current roster like it's one of Crean's early teams. Archie gets plenty of time to implement his system and turn it around, but I think we should be better than we are right now.

Why? Tell me what this collection of players does well? Who is a great shooter on this team? Who is a great scorer? Who is a great defender? Who’s really good at penetrating and finishing? This team doesn’t shoot well, doesn’t really have anyone that can get to the rim from the perimeter, has no length, isn’t overaly athletic. 

Its a team of role players. There nobody that’s paticularly great at any one thing. It’s just not a strong, well constructed roster. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Why? Tell me what this collection of players does well? Who is a great shooter on this team? Who is a great scorer? Who is a great defender? Who’s really good at penetrating and finishing? This team doesn’t shoot well, doesn’t really have anyone that can get to the rim from the perimeter, has no length, isn’t overaly athletic. 

Its a team of role players. There nobody that’s paticularly great at any one thing. It’s just not a strong, well constructed roster. 

Priller sets screens like a madman :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Why? Tell me what this collection of players does well? Who is a great shooter on this team? Who is a great scorer? Who is a great defender? Who’s really good at penetrating and finishing? This team doesn’t shoot well, doesn’t really have anyone that can get to the rim from the perimeter, has no length, isn’t overaly athletic. 

Its a team of role players. There nobody that’s paticularly great at any one thing. It’s just not a strong, well constructed roster. 

Why the focus on "great"? I don't think this roster is great, and I didn't expect this team to be great. I don't think it's a dumpster fire either. Johnson made 120 threes the past two seasons, and did it shooting at a 40% clip. Hartman also shot 40%+ from three his last two seasons. Both started for a Big Ten championship team. Davis is a high level big with great touch around the basket. You can absolutely build an offense around him. Morgan may not be great at any one thing, but he's pretty good at lots of things. He could contribute for a lot of good teams. Length is an issue because we choose to play three guards - a lineup of Durham-Johnson-Hartman-Morgan-Davis would be plenty long. That makes depth an issue down low, so we'd probably want to slow the pace down, not a bad idea since our guards are mostly mediocre anyway and we're better playing through the post. The bigger lineup also means more time for Smith who is extremely athletic and a promising prospect going forward.

I did not expect us to be world beaters. Maybe a bubble team. But this team is miles from the NIT at this point.

This is probably my last post on the subject, since I don't see either of us changing our minds, and I don't particularly enjoy taking on the negative role. The season is still young and we have looked a bit better as of late. I'm looking forward to seeing what kind of progress Archie can make going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our team isn't bad this year but they have one fatal flaw and that is shooting.  We had plently of wide open looks against Duke and UL and just couldn't make any.  Anderson will help immensely in that regard.  I don't think we get Romeo but if so that is a great roster next season with no major flaws and maybe the B1G favorite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Shooter said:

Why the focus on "great"? I don't think this roster is great, and I didn't expect this team to be great. I don't think it's a dumpster fire either. Johnson made 120 threes the past two seasons, and did it shooting at a 40% clip. Hartman also shot 40%+ from three his last two seasons. Both started for a Big Ten championship team. Davis is a high level big with great touch around the basket. You can absolutely build an offense around him. Morgan may not be great at any one thing, but he's pretty good at lots of things. He could contribute for a lot of good teams. Length is an issue because we choose to play three guards - a lineup of Durham-Johnson-Hartman-Morgan-Davis would be plenty long. That makes depth an issue down low, so we'd probably want to slow the pace down, not a bad idea since our guards are mostly mediocre anyway and we're better playing through the post. The bigger lineup also means more time for Smith who is extremely athletic and a promising prospect going forward.

I did not expect us to be world beaters. Maybe a bubble team. But this team is miles from the NIT at this point.

This is probably my last post on the subject, since I don't see either of us changing our minds, and I don't particularly enjoy taking on the negative role. The season is still young and we have looked a bit better as of late. I'm looking forward to seeing what kind of progress Archie can make going forward.

2 things about Rojo:

1. When he was playing with JBJ, TB, and OG - he was the 4th option on offense. He didn't have to initiate his own offense or the offense for those 3. Now that he is drawing the other teams best perimeter defender, his shooting numbers have come way down and he is struggling to initiate the offense.

2. I think he thrived in a 'role player' type of role with the 3 mentioned above, but is struggling in a 'lead player' role on this team.

Maybe having him come off the bench for a few games will help him realize that Davis and Morgan are primary options and he can ease back into not putting so much pressure on himself? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another thing we as Indiana fans are going to have to come to grips with is that Indiana kids just don't want to go to IU anymore.  Somewhere along the line, kids lose the "I want to play for IU when i grow up" mentality.  And we have to realize this.  Maybe in a few years if CAM really starts competing on the national stage this can start to swing back but we have to come to grips with it.  The top talent just wants to play elsewhere, for well established coaches, who compete for National Titles.  That is not IU and as 5fouls stated, hasn't been for a long time.

I hope we get back there.  I hope to hang more banners and i hope that kids start saying i want to play for IU when i graduate.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

Another thing we as Indiana fans are going to have to come to grips with is that Indiana kids just don't want to go to IU anymore.  Somewhere along the line, kids lose the "I want to play for IU when i grow up" mentality.  And we have to realize this.  Maybe in a few years if CAM really starts competing on the national stage this can start to swing back but we have to come to grips with it.  The top talent just wants to play elsewhere, for well established coaches, who compete for National Titles.  That is not IU and as 5fouls stated, hasn't been for a long time.

I hope we get back there.  I hope to hang more banners and i hope that kids start saying i want to play for IU when i graduate.  

This is kind of true. We did start getting Indiana kids under CTC. There are plenty we didn't get, but we did get Jordy Hulls, Cody Zeller, Yogi Ferrell. Don't forget, Hollowell and Patterson were thought very highly of. We did get Blackmon and at one point, Trey Lyles...we all know what happened with Lyles. Seems like we *had* Gary Harris for a while, and obviously lost out on him. Jaquan Lyle was a big time recruit we were in on. We have Collin Hartman. Don't get me wrong, we missed on plenty, but that's an impressive list of Indiana only kids. 

To be fair, times have changed. Everything is more national and more global these days. "Back in the day," not every game was televised. Communication and travel is completely different. It was probably less driven by shoe brands and "one and done" and ESPN hype and highlight plays and diva recruits. But Crean got some key Indiana kids. Archie walked in and....(I'm not familiar with ALL the top Indiana kids, so maybe I am off)... landed a couple really good ones already...is in Romeo's final 3 (I'll venture to say we are final 2)...is in good with TJD and Brooks. He's only coached 10 games here and has never recruited this level of players as a HC...but yet, we still have our top in-state players either coming to IU, or seriously considering it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we need to put a lot into perspective.

First of all, as long as IU has a strong/proud fan base, resources/money being put into the program, and great in-state talent.....we'll always have a shot of returning to the 'glory days.'

I'll argue that the mis-steps of previous administrations have put us in our present situation. Other great programs have recently had their down times: UNC had it with Doherty. Kentucky with Gillespie. The difference is that their administrations recognized mediocrity earlier. IU dropped the ball when they let Davis become head coach and then not firing him earlier than they should have. Kelvin Sampson ethical issues set us back even further. It's hard to argue if they held on to Crean for too long, but at least we did what we needed to do last year. Crean should have been our Doherty or Gillespie, but we putzed around for 10 years! 

It's been a series of administrative mis-steps for the last 20 years...especially the first 15. The brand may have taken a hit during this time, but we are still a strong program that will rise again as long as the people in charge make good decisions. I think UCLA is in the same position and I believe, they too, are one good hire (not Alford) from being a dominate program again. Their history and their resources are strong enough to keep them afloat until they find the right guy. 

Syracuse, Duke, MSU, Louisville and UNC again are about to go through the same roller coaster ride. Their success will be determined by who they hire as HC and their ability to evaluate if said head coach will lead them to mediocrity or success. 

All that said, and call me impatient, Archie should only have 3 years (4 years tops) to prove that he's going to be something special. If we want to consider ourselves a top program then we'll have to objectively evaluate and act as fast as the other top programs do. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

I think we need to put a lot into perspective.

First of all, as long as IU has a strong/proud fan base, resources/money being put into the program, and great in-state talent.....we'll always have a shot of returning to the 'glory days.'

I'll argue that the mis-steps of previous administrations have put us in our present situation. Other great programs have recently had their down times: UNC had it with Doherty. Kentucky with Gillespie. The difference is that their administrations recognized mediocrity earlier. IU dropped the ball when they let Davis become head coach and then not firing him earlier than they should have. Kelvin Sampson ethical issues set us back even further. It's hard to argue if they held on to Crean for too long, but at least we did what we needed to do last year. Crean should have been our Doherty or Gillespie, but we putzed around for 10 years! 

It's been a series of administrative mis-steps for the last 20 years...especially the first 15. The brand may have taken a hit during this time, but we are still a strong program that will rise again as long as the people in charge make good decisions. I think UCLA is in the same position and I believe, they too, are one good hire (not Alford) from being a dominate program again. Their history and their resources are strong enough to keep them afloat until they find the right guy. 

Syracuse, Duke, MSU, Louisville and UNC again are about to go through the same roller coaster ride. Their success will be determined by who they hire as HC and their ability to evaluate if said head coach will lead them to mediocrity or success. 

All that said, and call me impatient, Archie should only have 3 years (4 years tops) to prove that he's going to be something special. If we want to consider ourselves a top program then we'll have to objectively evaluate and act as fast as the other top programs do. 

 

The difference being UNC and UK were able to bring in proven commodities to replace their missteps. We brought in a promising but unproven head coach.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

The difference being UNC and UK were able to bring in proven commodities to replace their missteps. We brought in a promising but unproven head coach.

While that is true, we would have had a chance to bring in a proven head coach if they didn't mess around with Davis. 

Those schools also jumped on the opportunity to get the better guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, rico said:

Should have never hired Davis.  That being said look around you older guys.  Where is DePaul without Ray Meyer?  Where is UNLV without Tarkanian?  The list goes on and on.  

True. Of the schools I mentioned above that are about to go through coaching changes I'm not sure if MSU and Syracuse will be able to maintain their level of success. I think UNC and Duke will be good again, but they have a much stronger basketball brand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, CauseThatsMyDJ said:

An NIT team lost its three best players. We are lucky to be this competitive. Outside of the ISU game, this team has been as could be expected. 

If OG was not out with a torn ACL, and Collin lost as well, that most likely would not have been an NIT team. A lot of black and white statements in an area that is at best grey. OG is killing it in the NBA. He and Collin would've made a real difference. 

Also think it's still early in the season for an assessment that says we are lucky to be this competitive. The team is getting better. We could've won that Louisville game.

I have always doubted that this was a tourney team, since we lost those three players -- and all but one double digit scorer -- but it's early December., and the team's play is improving.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of good posts and perspectives, which make this place a great one for us fans to hang out. :)

My point of view is as BGleas said, we don't have a good, well-constructed team (skill and physicality wise); we got a bunch of role players. With that said, almost every team in the country has some flaws in its game, but a better team is able to compensate its deficiency with 'intangible' aspects such as basketball IQ, better coaching and right preparation, and last but not the least 'grit'. How many of our players pass our eye test that they have displayed burning desire/will to win?

We've seen many times in March madness that teams in much lower seeds playing their hearts out without fear and eventually beating one of that year's contenders. I think that's the beauty of college games. Talents and skills win most of the time, but lesser-talented, lesser-skilled kids with big hearts got a chance in the spotlight. 

I've always felt that our players in general in Crean era were very good kids, but somehow a lot of them didn't have 'character'. Or maybe they did, but coach wasn't able to develop. I don't think one summer and 10 games under CAM was enough to fix this issue. Maybe some of the older players should just graduate, or they would somehow find their inner strength along the way and turn the season around. 

In the end, a team of bunch of role players can have a great season if they fight tooth and nail and really care about winning, not just pretending. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

I have always doubted that this was a tourney team, since we lost those three players -- and all but one double digit scorer -- but it's early December., and the team's play is improving.

Completely agree. As I've made clear in this thread and others, I just don't think we have the talent to be a really good, consistent team. But, I'm also sold on Archie. The guy can coach. You can already see the improvement in this team from an X's/O's perspective, substitution patterns compared to the old regime, bball IQ, purposeful play in the system, etc. I think this team will continue to progress and get better, and who knows what might happen with the Big Ten being so bad. Unless RoJo gets his shooting stroke back though, I fear perimeter shooting will ultimately be the thing that makes this an NIT team. 

But, I'm all in on Archie at this point and am really only questioning how well he'll recruit, which remains to be seen. I don't mean that as a dig, just an open question that only time can answer, and when I say it's a question we just don't know what his ceiling will be as a recruiter yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is just my honest opinion & thoughts on this subject !! I think IU Fans were Spoiled by Branch McCracken & Bob Knight's FIVE NCAA Championships and are just frustrated because The Hoosiers have not continued to put up more NCAA BANNERS ? Having said that  , I think that all IU Fans need to lower their expectations right NOW !! THEN , we can all enjoy the moment when IU does put another NCAA Championship Banner !! I am 76 years old and I still believe that I will still be alive when that SIXTH NCAA CHAMPIONSHIP BANNER IS PUT IN PLACE in ASSEMBLY HALL !! Go Hoosiers !! P.S IU's current national RECRUITING ranking for the 2018-2019 season is #22 IN THE NATION !! Archie is not done with this class either !! With Curtis Jones transferring out , Archie has another scholarship available !! I think the Spring Signing period could still be BIG for Archie and The Hoosiers !!

P.S. [again] If IU only makes it to the NIT POST SEASON TOURNAMENT , I will be happy with that ! The NIT was the FIRST NATIONAL TOURNAMENT and Bob Knight certainly enjoyed taking Army and IU  BOTH to  the NIT !! It would be the greatest coaching job ever in NCAA D1 basketball history [ imho] If Archie and his Staff get IU into the "Big Dance "' this season !! Having said that , It ain't over until the Fat Lady sings and she hasn't even started to warm up her vocal cords yet , VBG !!!! Nothing really surprises me in College Basketball's World today !!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...