Northwestern Pregame

[Hoosierhoopster]

3 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

The first class included one of his own recruits in Race Thompson, another player (Durham) who has started 75% of his games while at IU, and Justin Smith who started over 74% of his games at IU. Sure, Durham and Smith where "recruited by the former coach for a completely different system" but they were never coached or taught that other system. 

However, by even bringing that up it's clear you're missing my point completely. IU has been recruiting as well or better than anyone in the B1G yet are still middle of the pack at best when it comes to actually winning games. And that is with a stud pre-season All-America player who is being talked about as a NPOY candidate. Is your only explanation for this that it takes 5-8 years to implement a system? In that case, it's the wrong system since players are in college for 4 years or less. But it doesn't take that long to implement one. Many of the coaches that have been used as examples have typically shown a marked improvement by years 3 or 4. For Miller, year 3 saw a tie for 10th in the B1G and squeaking in to the NCAAT.

Sure, the team has made incremental improvements in stats but that hasn't translated into wins, particularly in conference. At some point it needs to. And, again, 2/3 of the season is played in conference which is why doing well against conference opponents is very important. 

My "agenda" is wanting to see IU win games. I'm tired of hearing how tough the B1G is and how we should be satisfied with a 6th or 7th place finish, or that conference standing doesn't matter. From the recruiting classes it looks like they should be better than that and how you perform against 2/3 of your schedule does matter.

I would also point out that NCAA selection is done by a committee which is comprised of people. They make mistakes and have biases. When you're finishing 8 or 9 or 10th (or worse, tied for 10th but get 11th seed in your conference's tournament) you're leaving open the possibility of being left out because they don't want that many teams from the same conference in the tournament. Sometimes SOS matters to the committee and in those years playing in the B1G but having a not great record might be okay. In other years they don't really care about SOS and look more at win totals so in those years not having a great record in conference could really hurt. Last example of this was 2019.

Don't think @FKIM01 missed your point at all. Instead, it looks like you're glossing over his point and being dismissive as to timing and impact of a coach playing another coach's recruits and integrating his own recruits and style, particularly when the style differs significantly from the former coach. 

Sure, Justin Smith played and started -- out of position -- because that's who CAM had on the team. Regardless, the styles of CAM and CTC are just about polar opposite, and players are recruited for a coach's style and system -- when they come in they don't magically become different players just because they're coached by a different coach than the one who recruited them.

The players who CAM recruits fit his style and system, the players CTC recruited generally did not. And as the many coaches who've been listed before reflect, it often takes a coach several years, 4-5 or whatever, to get their systems integrated with their new recruits while the former coach's recruits are still on the team.

CAM has improved the team every single year, that's not reasonably debatable. CAM has brought in a number of elite recruits, recruiting generally has been strong. Whether or not we squeaked in or were decidedly in the tourney but for Covid, we were in, and by all signs we're becoming a better team despite losing Smith -- he didn't fit the system CAM wants to run. It's true we're not, yet, competing at the top of the B1G. Whether CAM builds the team into one that regularly competes at the top of the B1G remains to be seen, but it's just too early to say we're not headed there. 

[KoB2011]

Our YoY improvement under CAM looks really similar to Virginia under Tony Bennett, if not a little better. That's a system that clearly can win a lot of games and win titles.

I think it's an ugly system which is why some of our fans don't see the improvement, but it's hard to argue about how effective it is. 

[FKIM01]

😂😂😂...I knew I was wasting my time with that response.  Not sure some folks even want to see the reality of what has transpired. 

Very unlikely Miller would have recruited anyone but Race Thompson in that first class. It's called making lemonade out of lemons.

[IUFLA]

3 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Our YoY improvement under CAM looks really similar to Virginia under Tony Bennett, if not a little better. That's a system that clearly can win a lot of games and win titles.

I think it's an ugly system which is why some of our fans don't see the improvement, but it's hard to argue about how effective it is. 

Lots of correlation there...Took his offense a while to catch up to the defense...

Bennett started in the 2009-2010,campaign...

2009-10 Virginia Cavaliers
Record: 15-16 (5-11, 9th in ACC)

ORtg: 102.2 (166th of 347)

DRtg: 99.2 (137th of 347)

2010-11 Virginia Cavaliers
Record: 16-15 (7-9, 7th in ACC)

ORtg: 99.5 (230th of 345)

DRtg: 100.4 (154th of 345)

2011-12 Virginia Cavaliers
Record: 22-10 (9-7, 4th in ACC)

ORtg: 101.9 (170th of 344)

DRtg: 88.4 (2nd of 344)

2012-13 Virginia Cavaliers
Record: 23-12 (11-7, 4th in ACC)

ORtg: 104.4 (107th of 347)

DRtg: 90.3 (16th of 347)

2013-14 Virginia Cavaliers 
Record: 30-7 (16-2, 1st in ACC)

ORtg: 108.8 (89th of 351)

DRtg: 91.6 (9th of 351)

2014-15 Virginia Cavaliers
Record: 30-4 (16-2, 1st in ACC)

ORtg: 110.8 (32nd of 351)

DRtg: 87.2 (2nd of 351)

2015-16 Virginia Cavaliers
Record: 29-8 (13-5, 2nd in ACC)

ORtg: 115.0 (16th of 351)

DRtg: 97.3 (47th of 351)

2016-17 Virginia Cavaliers
Record: 23-11 (11-7, 5th in ACC)

ORtg: 107.9 (100th of 351)

DRtg: 92.1 (6th of 351)

2017-18 Virginia Cavaliers 
Record: 31-3 (17-1, 1st in ACC)

ORtg: 110.4 (58th of 351)

DRtg: 88.8 (2nd of 351)

2018-19 Virginia Cavaliers (National Champions)
Record: 35-3 (16-2, 1st in ACC)

ORtg: 116.3 (4th of 353)

DRtg: 91.3 (6th of 353)

2019-20 Virginia Cavaliers 
Record: 23-7 (15-5, 2nd in ACC)

ORtg: 93.5 (330th of 353)

DRtg: 85.8 (1st of 353)

I think we'd all take that 11 year stretch...

 

[Hippopotamo]

1 hour ago, go_iu_bb said:

The first class included one of his own recruits in Race Thompson, another player (Durham) who has started 75% of his games while at IU, and Justin Smith who started over 74% of his games at IU. Sure, Durham and Smith where "recruited by the former coach for a completely different system" but they were never coached or taught that other system. 

However, by even bringing that up it's clear you're missing my point completely. IU has been recruiting as well or better than anyone in the B1G yet are still middle of the pack at best when it comes to actually winning games. And that is with a stud pre-season All-America player who is being talked about as a NPOY candidate. Is your only explanation for this that it takes 5-8 years to implement a system? In that case, it's the wrong system since players are in college for 4 years or less. But it doesn't take that long to implement one. Many of the coaches that have been used as examples have typically shown a marked improvement by years 3 or 4. For Miller, year 3 saw a tie for 10th in the B1G and squeaking in to the NCAAT.

Sure, the team has made incremental improvements in stats but that hasn't translated into wins, particularly in conference. At some point it needs to. And, again, 2/3 of the season is played in conference which is why doing well against conference opponents is very important. 

My "agenda" is wanting to see IU win games. I'm tired of hearing how tough the B1G is and how we should be satisfied with a 6th or 7th place finish, or that conference standing doesn't matter. From the recruiting classes it looks like they should be better than that and how you perform against 2/3 of your schedule does matter.

I would also point out that NCAA selection is done by a committee which is comprised of people. They make mistakes and have biases. When you're finishing 8 or 9 or 10th (or worse, tied for 10th but get 11th seed in your conference's tournament) you're leaving open the possibility of being left out because they don't want that many teams from the same conference in the tournament. Sometimes SOS matters to the committee and in those years playing in the B1G but having a not great record might be okay. In other years they don't really care about SOS and look more at win totals so in those years not having a great record in conference could really hurt. Last example of this was 2019.

The selection committee doesn’t even look at conference record when selecting the tournament teams. 

[FKIM01]

38 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Our YoY improvement under CAM looks really similar to Virginia under Tony Bennett, if not a little better. That's a system that clearly can win a lot of games and win titles.

I think it's an ugly system which is why some of our fans don't see the improvement, but it's hard to argue about how effective it is. 

Can't disagree with what you've said here except that it feels like IU gets out and runs a little more opportunistically than Virginia does.  Someone can quote pace numbers to either refute or back that up, but it at least seems like IU is playing quite a bit faster than Virginia, especially this year.

[go_iu_bb]

27 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Don't think @FKIM01 missed your point at all. Instead, it looks like you're glossing over his point and being dismissive as to timing and impact of a coach playing another coach's recruits and integrating his own recruits and style, particularly when the style differs significantly from the former coach. 

Sure, Justin Smith played and started -- out of position -- because that's who CAM had on the team. Regardless, the styles of CAM and CTC are just about polar opposite, and players are recruited for a coach's style and system -- when they come in they don't magically become different players just because they're coached by a different coach than the one who recruited them.

The players who CAM recruits fit his style and system, the players CTC recruited generally did not. And as the many coaches who've been listed before reflect, it often takes a coach several years, 4-5 or whatever, to get their systems integrated with their new recruits while the former coach's recruits are still on the team.

CAM has improved the team every single year, that's not reasonably debatable. CAM has brought in a number of elite recruits, recruiting generally has been strong. Whether or not we squeaked in or were decidedly in the tourney but for Covid, we were in, and by all signs we're becoming a better team despite losing Smith -- he didn't fit the system CAM wants to run. It's true we're not, yet, competing at the top of the B1G. Whether CAM builds the team into one that regularly competes at the top of the B1G remains to be seen, but it's just too early to say we're not headed there. 

Miller didn't have to keep any of Crean's recruits that year. Releasing a player from their NLI doesn't count against the school in any way. It was spring so finding replacements would've been difficult but releasing them and picking up some transfers or something might've been the best thing for players who don't fit the system. Miller not only didn't do that, he went and re-recruited them. Then he started them for most of their time at IU. So he seems to think they fit his system well enough. The whole recruited for another system seems like a fan excuse because Miller decided to keep them, start them, and play them significant minutes over players he specifically recruited for his system.

You're both ignoring the main point. Miller has had as much or more talent brought in than most teams in the B1G during his tenure. Yet they're still expected to be middle of the pack and that's with a stud in TJD. Neither of you really see a problem with that? 5-8 years seems like a long time for getting a system implemented, especially when college players are there for 4 or less.

At some point the improvements that he's made need to start translating into wins. Granted it's early in the season but kenpom has IU at 48th in Adjusted Offense, which is decent, and 8th in Adjusted Defense, which is elite. Do those seem like numbers that should be finishing 7th in the conference? What do you think if those numbers hold up and they just do finish that low in conference?

Next year appears to be close to the same team as this one except it probably won't have TJD and possibly won't have Durham. Brunk may not be here next year either but he hasn't played this year and may not so that's moot.

[dbmhoosier]

50 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

Our YoY improvement under CAM looks really similar to Virginia under Tony Bennett, if not a little better. That's a system that clearly can win a lot of games and win titles.

I think it's an ugly system which is why some of our fans don't see the improvement, but it's hard to argue about how effective it is. 

The thing is that Bennett won the ACC in years 5 and 6.  Unless this season results in a deep tourney run then year 5 absolutely has to be Archie's best season yet.  He can't have a drop off even if Trayce leaves.

[go_iu_bb]

22 minutes ago, Hippopotamo said:

The selection committee doesn’t even look at conference record when selecting the tournament teams. 

They don't ignore 2/3 of the schedule. Conference record shows up in overall record one way or another. Besides, they're humans who follow basketball. They know where teams place. There have been times in the past where committee members have said they couldn't justify adding yet another team from the same conference as part of their reasoning for leaving a team out.

[Hoosierhoopster]

1 minute ago, go_iu_bb said:

Miller didn't have to keep any of Crean's recruits that year. Releasing a player from their NLI doesn't count against the school in any way. It was spring so finding replacements would've been difficult but releasing them and picking up some transfers or something might've been the best thing for players who don't fit the system. Miller not only didn't do that, he went and re-recruited them. Then he started them for most of their time at IU. So he seems to think they fit his system well enough. The whole recruited for another system seems like a fan excuse because Miller decided to keep them, start them, and play them significant minutes over players he specifically recruited for his system.

You're both ignoring the main point. Miller has had as much or more talent brought in than most teams in the B1G during his tenure. Yet they're still expected to be middle of the pack and that's with a stud in TJD. Neither of you really see a problem with that? 5-8 years seems like a long time for getting a system implemented, especially when college players are there for 4 or less.

At some point the improvements that he's made need to start translating into wins. Granted it's early in the season but kenpom has IU at 48th in Adjusted Offense, which is decent, and 8th in Adjusted Defense, which is elite. Do those seem like numbers that should be finishing 7th in the conference? What do you think if those numbers hold up and they just do finish that low in conference?

Next year appears to be close to the same team as this one except it probably won't have TJD and possibly won't have Durham. Brunk may not be here next year either but he hasn't played this year and may not so that's moot.

No it just doesn't work that way. CAM came in and wasn't going to go about cleaning house he worked with what the current team and recruiting was. It's you who is ignoring the point. CAM is still early in his tenure, he has "translated' his recruiting into wins, the team is better every year, he just hasn't gotten us -- yet - to competing at the top of the B1G, and that would be the aberration, not the norm. Most new coaches do not just come in and vault to the top of a power conference, most, and you've been given examples, take a few years. We're pretty clearly on a pretty good path, whether it pans out remains to be seen.

[FKIM01]

4 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

No it just doesn't work that way. CAM came in and wasn't going to go about cleaning house he worked with what the current team and recruiting was. It's you who is ignoring the point. CAM is still early in his tenure, he has "translated' his recruiting into wins, the team is better every year, he just hasn't gotten us -- yet - to competing at the top of the B1G, and that would be the aberration, not the norm. Most new coaches do not just come in and vault to the top of a power conference, most, and you've been given examples, take a few years. We're pretty clearly on a pretty good path, whether it pans out remains to be seen.

This. I'm tired of debating. 

The only coach I recall coming in and winning immediately was Calipari. I'm sure there are others but it's a much smaller fraternity. We see how Calipari's model is working now.

[IU Scott]

6 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

They don't ignore 2/3 of the schedule. Conference record shows up in overall record one way or another. Besides, they're humans who follow basketball. They know where teams place. There have been times in the past where committee members have said they couldn't justify adding yet another team from the same conference as part of their reasoning for leaving a team out.

I have seen many people who has went through the mock selection process and they said they never talk about conferences.

[Steubenhoosier]

2 hours ago, go_iu_bb said:

Miller didn't have to keep any of Crean's recruits that year. Releasing a player from their NLI doesn't count against the school in any way. It was spring so finding replacements would've been difficult but releasing them and picking up some transfers or something might've been the best thing for players who don't fit the system. Miller not only didn't do that, he went and re-recruited them. Then he started them for most of their time at IU. So he seems to think they fit his system well enough. The whole recruited for another system seems like a fan excuse because Miller decided to keep them, start them, and play them significant minutes over players he specifically recruited for his system.

You're both ignoring the main point. Miller has had as much or more talent brought in than most teams in the B1G during his tenure. Yet they're still expected to be middle of the pack and that's with a stud in TJD. Neither of you really see a problem with that? 5-8 years seems like a long time for getting a system implemented, especially when college players are there for 4 or less.

At some point the improvements that he's made need to start translating into wins. Granted it's early in the season but kenpom has IU at 48th in Adjusted Offense, which is decent, and 8th in Adjusted Defense, which is elite. Do those seem like numbers that should be finishing 7th in the conference? What do you think if those numbers hold up and they just do finish that low in conference?

Next year appears to be close to the same team as this one except it probably won't have TJD and possibly won't have Durham. Brunk may not be here next year either but he hasn't played this year and may not so that's moot.

pretty sure that due to APR reasons/problems, CAM couldn't let go of Crean's recruits

[go_iu_bb]

Just now, Steubenhoosier said:

pretty sure that due to APR reasons/problems, CAM couldn't let go of Crean's recruits

Not true. APR would apply to the players already on the team, not the incoming recruits. Until a player is actually enrolled in the school and officially part of the team they can be released from their NLI and it does not count against the school in any way. So he couldn't get rid of Green or Davis, for instance, without taking an APR hit but he could've released Durham, Smith, and Moore from their commitments without an APR hit.

[Steubenhoosier]

2 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

Not true. APR would apply to the players already on the team, not the incoming recruits. Until a player is actually enrolled in the school and officially part of the team they can be released from their NLI and it does not count against the school in any way. So he couldn't get rid of Green or Davis, for instance, without taking an APR hit but he could've released Durham, Smith, and Moore from their commitments without an APR hit.

gotcha

[FKIM01]

2 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

Not true. APR would apply to the players already on the team, not the incoming recruits. Until a player is actually enrolled in the school and officially part of the team they can be released from their NLI and it does not count against the school in any way. So he couldn't get rid of Green or Davis, for instance, without taking an APR hit but he could've released Durham, Smith, and Moore from their commitments without an APR hit.

He could have, but based on when he was hired, there was no time to go out and assemble a different class.  Keeping the kids Crean recruited was far preferable to going out and recruiting April and Priller.

[Hoosierhoopster]

9 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

He could have, but based on when he was hired, there was no time to go out and assemble a different class.  Keeping the kids Crean recruited was far preferable to going out and recruiting April and Priller.

Priller was the Bomb though! 

[go_iu_bb]

3 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

He could have, but based on when he was hired, there was no time to go out and assemble a different class.  Keeping the kids Crean recruited was far preferable to going out and recruiting April and Priller.

But if they're just players that don't fit his system, as I keep getting told, then it would be better to get some transfers or leave the scholarships open to use the next year. So there were options other than taking the players or recruiting the next April/Priller.

You guys keep saying that IU isn't further along because players like Durham and Smith weren't recruited for his system. Why should he have taken them then? Ill fitting recruits are better than no recruits?  A short handed first season taking the first season from bad to really bad would've been preferable if it resulted in a quicker transition.

[jefftheref]

18 minutes ago, FKIM01 said:

He could have, but based on when he was hired, there was no time to go out and assemble a different class.  Keeping the kids Crean recruited was far preferable to going out and recruiting April and Priller.

He also lost Bryant, Anunoby and James Blackmon who declared early, Curtis Jones transferred and Gelon got dismissed. If the first three would of stayed I suspect his first year would of been much better. 

[KoB2011]

3 hours ago, FKIM01 said:

Can't disagree with what you've said here except that it feels like IU gets out and runs a little more opportunistically than Virginia does.  Someone can quote pace numbers to either refute or back that up, but it at least seems like IU is playing quite a bit faster than Virginia, especially this year.

I would definitely agree with that, we don't play as slow as they do but we are still 238 in tempo. 

[KoB2011]

16 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

But if they're just players that don't fit his system, as I keep getting told, then it would be better to get some transfers or leave the scholarships open to use the next year. So there were options other than taking the players or recruiting the next April/Priller.

You guys keep saying that IU isn't further along because players like Durham and Smith weren't recruited for his system. Why should he have taken them then? Ill fitting recruits are better than no recruits?  A short handed first season taking the first season from bad to really bad would've been preferable if it resulted in a quicker transition.

He brought in a 6 man class the next year, did you want him to bring in 9 instead? 

[HoosierDom]

23 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

But if they're just players that don't fit his system, as I keep getting told, then it would be better to get some transfers or leave the scholarships open to use the next year. So there were options other than taking the players or recruiting the next April/Priller.

You guys keep saying that IU isn't further along because players like Durham and Smith weren't recruited for his system. Why should he have taken them then? Ill fitting recruits are better than no recruits?  A short handed first season taking the first season from bad to really bad would've been preferable if it resulted in a quicker transition.

No. First, all of the rumors I have heard suggest his hands were tied and he had to keep everyone on the team. Second, it's wrong to take away a kid's scholarship because a new coach wants to do things differently. IU agreed to give those kids scholarships and we would have been wrong to not do so because of a change in coaches. Third, having no new players does not accelerate growth. Imperfect fits are better than nothing, getting older, building cohesion, developing leadership and culture requires players to come in and stay. Despite his flaws we are better because we have Durham. We were better last year because we had Smith. 

You are focusing on the idea that they weren't Archie players, and that is important, however, they also just weren't that good. Look at the talent of the Crean players that have played under Archie, it is below average for the Big Ten. 

Archie players have played great defense and have improved. If Romeo didn't hurt his wrist and if Hunter was the elite scorer that some saw pre-injury, then there is a very good chance the last 3 years would have been exactly what I hoped for in a new coach. As is, they have been promising, but certainly not years where we over-performed my hopes. This year is looking good. I'm optimistic about next year. Archie has yet to prove that he is the coach we want, but he is on a trajectory that points us in that direction.

 

[IowaHoosierFan]

so we're playing Northwestern next?

[13th&Jackson]

41 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

so we're playing Northwestern next?

It would seem so. It appears to be northwest of the middle of Lake Michgan 

[dgambill]

1 hour ago, 13th&Jackson said:

It would seem so. It appears to be northwest of the middle of Lake Michgan 

And they are pretty good despite most writers saying they would finish last in the B1G.