Butler post game

[KoB2011]

Just now, IUfaninIllinois said:

How many non conference games do we play in a normal season? Because at 5-2 if we go 10-10 in the big ten we are only 15-12 and that’s tough record to get into tourney

You normally play 31 games, so we would be looking at likely 4 additional cupcakes. 

[IUfaninIllinois]

2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

You normally play 31 games, so we would be looking at likely 4 additional cupcakes. 

So yeah it’s gonna be important to try getting to 12-8

[KoB2011]

1 minute ago, IUfaninIllinois said:

So yeah it’s gonna be important to try getting to 12-8

No - every team has fewer games. 

Don't get me wrong, I want to get to 12-8 but if we are 10-10 we are probably safely in with our non conference. 

[IUfaninIllinois]

2 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

No - every team has fewer games. 

Don't get me wrong, I want to get to 12-8 but if we are 10-10 we are probably safely in with our non conference. 

That’s fair 

[IU Scott]

22 minutes ago, IUfaninIllinois said:

How many non conference games do we play in a normal season? Because at 5-2 if we go 10-10 in the big ten we are only 15-12 and that’s tough record to get into tourney

Normally we play 11 games

[NCHoosier32]

7 hours ago, IUfaninIllinois said:

How many non conference games do we play in a normal season? Because at 5-2 if we go 10-10 in the big ten we are only 15-12 and that’s tough record to get into tourney

this is one of the points i was making.  i think we are clearly a better Team this year.  more cohesive, etc., but will likely finish 15-12 or 14-13 which seems horrible, but with the strength of the B1G and less cupcakes... ugh.

[Hoosierhoopster]

9 hours ago, Reacher said:

 

Galloway is solid on D and offensively is like a point forward. The scoring isn't there yet, but the passing and decision making is.  If Rob isn't in, I think we need TG there to settle down / organize the offense. Much rather see the ball in   his hands than Al. Let Al bring the ball up but use TG to get the O going. I think it's apparent CAM trusts his decision making.  His drives will start to pay off in time. If that scoring starts to come, I think he will take some of Al's minutes. I am worried B1G teams will learn to play his passes. He does move the ball quick and his passes are usually on target.

As for Lander, he got the couple minutes in the first half but that was when we were falling behind. Remember, we were down 5 at the half- after a small run. It is easy to see why he didn't go back in that half. In the second half, we made our run and guys were playing well so I can't fault CAM for sticking with them. The last thing we needed was a poor sequence turning a 4 point lead into a 4 point deficit. I would have liked him to get a couple minutes late when Rob went to the bench with 4 fouls. Current reality is Lander is not being productive scoring or on D which limits his minutes. 

Rob plays great D and is a nice ball handler. Just wish he would pick a few spots during the game to be more aggressive. I wish we could count on him for 8-10ppg. 

Kind of surprised we have not seen any Geronimo lately. With Brunk out, I'd like to see Geronimo get 1-2 minutes per half in case we need some physicality with TJD and / or Race on the bench. 

Good feedback on the game. My concerns go to development for the season not thos one game against an ok Butler team, but again good feedback. Galloway has been impressive for sure, I just want that extra point guard push that Lander can bring and in a game where Rob struggled, had 4 fouls and himself was limited in minutes I would think getting Lander some run would be a good thing. Personally I don’t care if we lose to Butler if we’re developing key guys for conference play.

Think of how MSU often struggles early, while developing the key guys and sophs who didn’t play as much the prior year. I don’t like Izzo as a person but he does a great job developing his teams early and losses even to non D1 teams don’t matter when you end up with a tough balanced and deep team by mid season. 
Agree on Geronimo for the same reasons. The kid is super talented, not playing him at all is at best questionable to me. 

[IUFLA]

4 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Good feedback on the game. My concerns go to development for the season not thos one game against an ok Butler team, but again good feedback. Galloway has been impressive for sure, I just want that extra point guard push that Lander can bring and in a game where Rob struggled, had 4 fouls and himself was limited in minutes I would think getting Lander some run would be a good thing. Personally I don’t care if we lose to Butler if we’re developing key guys for conference play.

Think of how MSU often struggles early, while developing the key guys and sophs who didn’t play as much the prior year. I don’t like Izzo as a person but he does a great job developing his teams early and losses even to non D1 teams don’t matter when you end up with a tough balanced and deep team by mid season. 
Agree on Geronimo for the same reasons. The kid is super talented, not playing him at all is at best questionable to me. 

I'd agree with you in a regular year, but with the shortened non-conference schedule like this year, a loss to an "ok team" like Butler could be the difference between NCAA and NIT.

[tdhoosier]

31 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Personally I don’t care if we lose to Butler if we’re developing key guys for conference play.

I just can’t get behind this knowing how every game has been so important these last few years of being on the bubble. 

I’m not saying you do this, but some (including myself) have criticized Crean and Archie in the past for substitution patterns and not allowing guys to get in the flow of the game. This year CAM isn’t as liberal with his substitutions and I like it.

In the game thread, the number one criticism In the first half was defense. Lander was partly responsible for two wide open threes (6 points) in the midst of Butler’s run. Plus, the guards in the second half were locked in and I can’t blame CAM for not wanting to disrupt that flow. We needed that win.....every win is crucial...especially in this shortened season. Lander will get his opportunities.

[go_iu_bb]

9 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

No - every team has fewer games. 

Don't get me wrong, I want to get to 12-8 but if we are 10-10 we are probably safely in with our non conference. 

Right. It's not as though IU is trying to get to the NCAAT having played only 27 games while everyone else plays 31. I doubt any team plays a full 31 game schedule since the season started late and there was so much uncertainty in the offseason that schedules weren't completed so everyone was scrambling to add games. 

Many teams may not even play as many as 27 games. Butler's game against IU was only their 3rd game. Duke has canceled the rest of their non-conference schedule. Florida canceled several games after Johnson went down. DePaul hasn't even played a game yet. 

This is going to be a weird season and NCAAT. Usually the threshold to to make it in as an at large bid is around 20 games won. This season there will probably be teams in there that only played 20 games total, maybe less. Kind of like how OSU will probably make the football playoff with only 6 games played.

[Hoosierhoopster]

59 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

I'd agree with you in a regular year, but with the shortened non-conference schedule like this year, a loss to an "ok team" like Butler could be the difference between NCAA and NIT.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, it's completely reasonable to say every w and every l is important. But to me it's losing sight of the forest in the trees. BTW not sure why you quoted "ok team." Butler is at best an ok team, frankly, it's mediocre.

Every team is going to have a bad loss or two. Getting so focused on one game is not the answer imo. If you can't see the importance of Lander to the team's future (not to mention recruiting) I don't know how to have the conversation with you. The comments that drive me crazy are those that gush about Galloway while being dismissive of Lander. You think he's the #1 ranked point in his class by chance, some kind of luck? Think he's not incredibly talented and exactly the kind of point guard IU needs going forward? Don't know what to tell you if you're so locked in the immediate that you can't see that. Drives me nuts, Lander is one of the best point guards in the country, he's clearly not ready right now, but he's also clearly key to IU's future. 

[tdhoosier]

13 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, it's completely reasonable to say every w and every l is important. But to me it's losing sight of the forest in the trees. BTW not sure why you quoted "ok team." Butler is at best an ok team, frankly, it's mediocre.

Every team is going to have a bad loss or two. Getting so focused on one game is not the answer imo. If you can't see the importance of Lander to the team's future (not to mention recruiting) I don't know how to have the conversation with you. The comments that drive me crazy are those that gush about Galloway while being dismissive of Lander. You think he's the #1 ranked point in his class by chance, some kind of luck? Think he's not incredibly talented and exactly the kind of point guard IU needs going forward? Don't know what to tell you if you're so locked in the immediate that you can't see that. Drives me nuts, Lander is one of the best point guards in the country, he's clearly not ready right now, but he's also clearly key to IU's future. 

Good discussion...that I’m butting my way into. Haha.

I think there’s more variables and it’s not as cut and dry as you are proposing. First, I’m not undermining the importance of Lander. However, we still need to remember that he’s skipping his senior year and who knows what type of discussions him and CAM have had in regards to playing time. 

In regards to recruiting, I think Lander is his own special case, being younger and more wirey than most top PGs. I also think winning records, post season success, and CAM’s job security are also import variables in regards to future recruiting success. 

If you are seeing it as just one or two games, I’m seeing a hypothetical record of 10-10 vs. a record of 12-8. A potential 7-8 seed with an almost certain second round exit vs. a potential 5-6 seed and a more likely trip to the second weekend. Of course, sweet sixteen playing experience is valuable and post season success is a huge factor in recruiting. 

Is that not seeing the forest through the trees? I just think we are just looking through different forests. 

Lander’s playing time has to be situational and not forced. Yesterday’s game was not the right situation, but those situations will come. 

[Hoosierhoopster]

27 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

Good discussion...that I’m butting my way into. Haha.

I think there’s more variables and it’s not as cut and dry as you are proposing. First, I’m not undermining the importance of Lander. However, we still need to remember that he’s skipping his senior year and who knows what type of discussions him and CAM have had in regards to playing time. 

In regards to recruiting, I think Lander is his own special case, being younger and more wirey than most top PGs. I also think winning records, post season success, and CAM’s job security are also import variables in regards to future recruiting success. 

If you are seeing it as just one or two games, I’m seeing a hypothetical record of 10-10 vs. a record of 12-8. A potential 7-8 seed with an almost certain second round exit vs. a potential 5-6 seed and a more likely trip to the second weekend. Of course, sweet sixteen playing experience is valuable and post season success is a huge factor in recruiting. 

Is that not seeing the forest through the trees? I just think we are just looking through different forests. 

Lander’s playing time has to be situational and not forced. Yesterday’s game was not the right situation, but those situations will come. 

This is all fair, but in fairness the assumption that by winning one game against Butler will be the difference between 10-10 v 12-8 is just speculation. We almost always win games we shouldn’t and lose games we shouldn’t. 12-8 would be exceptional this year and imo is unlikely anyway —

more importantly, the same people who are now waxing in this W and limiting minutes down to 8 players with Rob not scoring and in foul trouble will be railing on how we don’t have shooters and can’t score in B1G play, when our ability to score will be much much more difficult than against a mediocre Butler team. Trust me, we’ll be having the we can’t score discussion when we get blown out by a team like Wisconsin because our shooting is limited, our point guard play is limited, and the guys are playing too many minutes. A whole team playing 32 plus minutes while guys like Lander and Geronimo either play 2 minutes or none? Not a good call imo and I’m one who believes long - term in Cam and rarely criticizes his decisions, but I don’t like these decisions and don’t think they will help us down the road 

[go_iu_bb]

1 hour ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, it's completely reasonable to say every w and every l is important. But to me it's losing sight of the forest in the trees. BTW not sure why you quoted "ok team." Butler is at best an ok team, frankly, it's mediocre.

Every team is going to have a bad loss or two. Getting so focused on one game is not the answer imo. If you can't see the importance of Lander to the team's future (not to mention recruiting) I don't know how to have the conversation with you. The comments that drive me crazy are those that gush about Galloway while being dismissive of Lander. You think he's the #1 ranked point in his class by chance, some kind of luck? Think he's not incredibly talented and exactly the kind of point guard IU needs going forward? Don't know what to tell you if you're so locked in the immediate that you can't see that. Drives me nuts, Lander is one of the best point guards in the country, he's clearly not ready right now, but he's also clearly key to IU's future. 

Do you believe that the only way for a player to improve is by getting lots of minutes in games, even when he's not ready? In that case, are you against redshirting players since they don't see game action during that season?

Or is your concern that Lander will be unhappy about the lack of playing time and transfer at the end of the season?

I'm trying to understand why you're so adamant that Lander should be getting more minutes even though you admit he's not ready. To the point where you're willing to see the team lose games in a shortened season where every game is even more important than they usually are.

This is basically a redshirt year with the benefit of actually getting to see game action. I highly doubt Lander will exhaust his eligibility before going pro but someone like Leal will. He's also vital to the future of the program for that reason, yet I don't see you pushing for him to get more PT.

As far as improving, I do think that getting in to games can help improvement. Even the few minutes Lander saw against Butler better helps him get a feel for the speed of the game as well as generating some things to work on. Lander is still practicing against other D1 players.

So I see no problem with getting Lander, Leal, and Geronimo game experience when possible while also not sacrificing the win. If this was a bad team with little to no chance of making the NCAAT I'd probably look at it differently but it's not.

[Kdug]

8 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

This is all fair, but in fairness the assumption that by winning one game against Butler will be the difference between 10-10 v 12-8 is just speculation. We almost always win games we shouldn’t and lose games we shouldn’t. 12-8 would be exceptional this year and imo is unlikely anyway —

more importantly, the same people who are now waxing in this W and limiting minutes down to 8 players with Rob not scoring and in foul trouble will be railing on how we don’t have shooters and can’t score in B1G play, when our ability to score will be much much more difficult than against a mediocre Butler team. Trust me, we’ll be having the we can’t score discussion when we get blown out by a team like Wisconsin because our shooting is limited, our point guard play is limited, and the guys are playing too many minutes. A whole team playing 32 plus minutes while guys like Lander and Geronimo either play 2 minutes or none? Not a good call imo and I’m one who believes long - term in Cam and rarely criticizes his decisions, but I don’t like these decisions and don’t think they will help us down the road 

While Lander has huge potential, he haven't shown to be ready right now. He has the second highest TO rate (behind Geronimo) on the team, and he has the 2nd worst shooting percentage (behind Leal, who's only taken 5 shots) on the team. So objectively speaking, he's been one of our worst offensive players. And IMO, he's also looked a little lost on defense at times. None of this is to say he's a bad player, I just think he needs to improve a bit, play within himself, and slow things down before he's ready for more minutes.

Just because someone doesn't get big minutes in games doesn't mean they can't develop. There's a reason you see the biggest improvements in players over the offseason.

[IUFLA]

1 hour ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

not sure why you quoted "ok team."

Because I was quoting you. I agree that they're a mediocre team, and am not overlooking the fact they were without their leading scorer and having played only a few games.

1 hour ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

The comments that drive me crazy are those that gush about Galloway while being dismissive of Lander.

Why? Trey has obviously earned Archie's trust. Khristian hasn't. Galloway makes winning plays. He's not going to stuff a stat sheet, but anyone who watched yesterday's game could see we were a better team, on both ends of the floor, with him out there. He knows how the game should be played.

1 hour ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

You think he's the #1 ranked point in his class by chance, some kind of luck?

He was the #1 point guard in the 2021 class. Now, you have to rate him against the 2020 kids, and on physical and mental maturity alone he's not going to stack up to a Cade Cunningham.

I do understand some of your point, that getting him more game action will hopefully speed along his development. I'm sure in certain situations, foul problems, big leads/deficits he'll get playing time, but he'll make the biggest strides in practice. If he can start proving he's a better player than Al or Rob there, he'll start stealing their time.

[IUFLA]

Go to the thread where @coachadragna breaks down the Butler film... Go to the 7 minute mark. In about two and a half minutes Coach Tony outlines some of both Khristian's and Jerome's issues on the defensive end...

Great job by @coachadragna...

[tdhoosier]

25 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

This is all fair, but in fairness the assumption that by winning one game against Butler will be the difference between 10-10 v 12-8 is just speculation. We almost always win games we shouldn’t and lose games we shouldn’t. 12-8 would be exceptional this year and imo is unlikely anyway —

more importantly, the same people who are now waxing in this W and limiting minutes down to 8 players with Rob not scoring and in foul trouble will be railing on how we don’t have shooters and can’t score in B1G play, when our ability to score will be much much more difficult than against a mediocre Butler team. Trust me, we’ll be having the we can’t score discussion when we get blown out by a team like Wisconsin because our shooting is limited, our point guard play is limited, and the guys are playing too many minutes. A whole team playing 32 plus minutes while guys like Lander and Geronimo either play 2 minutes or none? Not a good call imo and I’m one who believes long - term in Cam and rarely criticizes his decisions, but I don’t like these decisions and don’t think they will help us down the road 

You were going off of the reasoning that every team has one or two bad losses. I’m saying a 2 win swing can mean a lot come selection time if we avoid those 2 losses. It could mean a 2 seed swing in this shortened season. Whether it’s 12-8, 11-9, or 10-10. Technically, everything is all speculation...even Lander being more valuable down the road because he’s seeing 5-10 more minutes a game this December. 

I’m also not saying Butler is a great win....it’s a decent win on a neutral court, but it very well could’ve been a bad loss. It was just not worth putting It in jeopardy, IMO. And although we waxed them in the second half, the game was pretty much within reach (6 points) until the last few minutes. 

I do understand your point. Just agreeing to disagree. 

[KoB2011]

I think the way Archie is playing the freshman will help recruiting, not hurt it. He's clearly playing the guy who has earned it, despite him bring the one with the least accolades coming in, and letting the others get more minutes against bad competition. 

CAM isn't willing to lose games to get guys minutes. That's what is best for the team and program. It's way more important that we make the tournament and are in a position to make the second weekend than it is that guys get a few more minutes than they're currently getting. We need to continue showing positive progress as a program. 

[bluegrassIU]

1 hour ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

This is all fair, but in fairness the assumption that by winning one game against Butler will be the difference between 10-10 v 12-8 is just speculation. We almost always win games we shouldn’t and lose games we shouldn’t. 12-8 would be exceptional this year and imo is unlikely anyway —

more importantly, the same people who are now waxing in this W and limiting minutes down to 8 players with Rob not scoring and in foul trouble will be railing on how we don’t have shooters and can’t score in B1G play, when our ability to score will be much much more difficult than against a mediocre Butler team. Trust me, we’ll be having the we can’t score discussion when we get blown out by a team like Wisconsin because our shooting is limited, our point guard play is limited, and the guys are playing too many minutes. A whole team playing 32 plus minutes while guys like Lander and Geronimo either play 2 minutes or none? Not a good call imo and I’m one who believes long - term in Cam and rarely criticizes his decisions, but I don’t like these decisions and don’t think they will help us down the road 

In a non-ovid season, I could see your point. This is different.

For all anybody knows, covid can cancel a handful, or even many games. Look how abbreviated the football season has been.

If games get cancelled, they go to a reduced tournament fiels...say 32 teams or whatever.....then every win and every loss is magnified big time.

This year, I think you have to do everything in your power to win the game in front of you. It may not be the season to build towards an end of season peak. Its too unpredictable.

[NCHoosier32]

bottom line - you have to try to win games.  play whoever is ready to help you win now.  play guys for development when it won't change the outcome of the game.  

[IU Scott]

11 minutes ago, NCHoosier32 said:

bottom line - you have to try to win games.  play whoever is ready to help you win now.  play guys for development when it won't change the outcome of the game.  

I just don't get why people are worried about Lander and his playing time.  I know it is different but freshman use to come in and waited their turn and was given to time to develop without the pressure of having to be a huge contributor.  I don't think coaches can win because fans will get upset if a coach loses and want their head on a platter.  On the other side they get ripped for doing what they feel is best for their team to win.

[BGleas]

56 minutes ago, NCHoosier32 said:

bottom line - you have to try to win games.  play whoever is ready to help you win now.  play guys for development when it won't change the outcome of the game.  

Agree. It's unfortunate for guys like Lander, Hunter and Geronimo that cupcake portion of the schedule is what got cut out, because those were the games to get them extended minutes. 

But you can't risk losing games to Butler, Stanford, Providence, etc., in the name of getting guys playing time. 

[NCHoosier32]

53 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I just don't get why people are worried about Lander and his playing time.  I know it is different but freshman use to come in and waited their turn and was given to time to develop without the pressure of having to be a huge contributor.  I don't think coaches can win because fans will get upset if a coach loses and want their head on a platter.  On the other side they get ripped for doing what they feel is best for their team to win.

i think we agree Scott!  i personally don't care how old a kid is.  if he helps us win, he plays a lot.  if he might cost a game, he doesn't.  if i can get him experience when the game is not on the line, great!

[Hoosierhoopster]

4 hours ago, go_iu_bb said:

Do you believe that the only way for a player to improve is by getting lots of minutes in games, even when he's not ready? In that case, are you against redshirting players since they don't see game action during that season?

Or is your concern that Lander will be unhappy about the lack of playing time and transfer at the end of the season?

I'm trying to understand why you're so adamant that Lander should be getting more minutes even though you admit he's not ready. To the point where you're willing to see the team lose games in a shortened season where every game is even more important than they usually are.

This is basically a redshirt year with the benefit of actually getting to see game action. I highly doubt Lander will exhaust his eligibility before going pro but someone like Leal will. He's also vital to the future of the program for that reason, yet I don't see you pushing for him to get more PT.

As far as improving, I do think that getting in to games can help improvement. Even the few minutes Lander saw against Butler better helps him get a feel for the speed of the game as well as generating some things to work on. Lander is still practicing against other D1 players.

So I see no problem with getting Lander, Leal, and Geronimo game experience when possible while also not sacrificing the win. If this was a bad team with little to no chance of making the NCAAT I'd probably look at it differently but it's not.

Why argue the extreme as a basis of a question?

Exactly when did I say a player needs a lot of minutes as the only way to improve? I mean seriously this is such a straw man it’s frankly annoying. Redshirt? What?? 
 

Lander played 2 min, Geronimo played zero. Should I respond with a silly question like do you think guys improve when they don’t play at all? Come on, if you want to have a discussion don’t throw out straw men and use that as a basis to critique a straightforward, obvious position.