Jump to content

Davis/Smith discussion


rico

Recommended Posts

I have been racking my brain ever since Davis got injured.  And this is a hypothetical scenario.  Let's say Justin gets us clicking and performs well as a starter.  Then let's say DD comes back in a couple/few weeks.  Does De'Ron loose his starting job?  To be honest, I can't think of a Hoosier in my lifetime that ever lost his starting job to an injury that wasn't season ending.  Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure, could be wrong here, but didn't OG come back off the bench initially, in the same season? Pretty sure there have been others. 

Regardless, if Smith performs anything like he did last game I'd bet on his staying in the lineup, as, I think, he should (in that scenario). CAM seems pretty focused on finding the right combination of players who help us play better/win as a team. In this last game, no question whatsoever that Smith did so. If he keeps up strong play, would have to think he continues to start/play major minutes. And to all those who were advocating getting him more time, well, pat yourselves on the back!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty sure Davis is out for the season, but since the question is a hypothetical I would hope that Archie would stick with Smith if the team is winning games and Smith is playing well. 

Here's where my first concern would come in with Archie. I'm assuming Hartman would have started Saturday if healthy, if Hartman is back Tuesday I'd be concerned a bit if he started over Smith against PSU. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BGleas said:

Here's where my first concern would come in with Archie. I'm assuming Hartman would have started Saturday if healthy, if Hartman is back Tuesday I'd be concerned a bit if he started over Smith against PSU. 

That simply can't happen.  Hartman for McRoberts if he feels he needs more from the outside, but Smith has to be in there until he shows he can't do it long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

That simply can't happen.  Hartman for McRoberts if he feels he needs more from the outside, but Smith has to be in there until he shows he can't do it long term.

Completely agree. Smith brings an element that nobody else on the team does. He's a long, athletic, skilled 3/4 player that can shoot. I really think just having a player like Smith paired with Morgan is what opened up the lanes for RoJo. I don't think it's a coincidence that RoJo got to the basket and finished on Saturday better than he had in any game this season. With Smith out there and Morgan knocking down some 3's it can completely change the offense. 

Smith will still have struggles and growing pains, but he needs to be out there for big minutes and playing worry-free basketball. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

The starters were not hurt but they were benched for the second half because we were already down 25 points.

No.  There was literally a game back in the day where night did not play any of the starters a single second after we had clinched the conference title.  Maybe it was Iowa, but I seem to remember Minnesota.

And, I knew they weren't hurt, hence the coffee emoji.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He returned for couple of  games after a shoulder injury which caused a lot of people saying that he was garbage because Indiana was playing much better without him which was stupid but very reminiscent of James Blackmon during the season he then got injured again this time a torn acl during the big ten tournament 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, 5fouls said:

No.  There was literally a game back in the day where night did not play any of the starters a single second after we had clinched the conference title.  Maybe it was Iowa, but I seem to remember Minnesota.

And, I knew they weren't hurt, hence the coffee emoji.  

 

I got a feeling you are talking Iowa in 1989.  The Hoosiers had the Big 10 clinched, rested their starters, and got beat by like 20 points.  Ironically, IU received a #2 seed.  Second place Illinois got a #1.  Bad move on Knight's part.  They shipped us out West.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, 5fouls said:

That simply can't happen.  Hartman for McRoberts if he feels he needs more from the outside, but Smith has to be in there until he shows he can't do it long term.

I know we all view them interchangeably, but McRoberts and Hartman do not play the same position.  McRoberts has played guard on offense and defense the entire season where Hartman has played forward.  Every meaningful minute we've played this season has been three guards and two forwards, I don't see it changing based on the unwillingness to do so to this point.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, rico said:

I got a feeling you are talking Iowa in 1989.  The Hoosiers had the Big 10 clinched, rested their starters, and got beat by like 20 points.  Ironically, IU received a #2 seed.  Second place Illinois got a #1.  Bad move on Knight's part.  They shipped us out West.

Speaking of 89. We get throttled early. Started 3-4 with Jadlow and Anderson. Knight grew tired of the turnovers and he went Jones, Hillman, and Edward and the rest is history. Never know when you might make yourself a Hoosier legend. I want Davis healthy because I believe he gives us the best chance to win. With that said....never know where Justin Smith can from here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

With regards to this topic, I think you clearly stick with Smith.  I posted this in another thread, but in the three games now he has gotten over 25 minutes he averages 15 points (double digits all three games) and 6.3 rebounds.  

But, how many deflections?  :coffee:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, KoB2011 said:

I know we all view them interchangeably, but McRoberts and Hartman do not play the same position.  McRoberts has played guard on offense and defense the entire season where Hartman has played forward.  Every meaningful minute we've played this season has been three guards and two forwards, I don't see it changing based on the unwillingness to do so to this point.  

There’s really no difference. McRoberts is a wing. When we play McRoberts we’re playing a bigger, more traditional lineup. Whether you want to call him a 2-guard or a small forward, they’re both wing positions, and when McRoberts is in we only have two traditional guards in the lineup. 

In the future you’re going to see point guard, wing, wing, stretch 4, Big. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, BGleas said:

There’s really no difference. McRoberts is a wing. When we play McRoberts we’re playing a bigger, more traditional lineup. Whether you want to call him a 2-guard or a small forward, they’re both wing positions, and when McRoberts is in we only have two traditional guards in the lineup. 

In the future you’re going to see point guard, wing, wing, stretch 4, Big. 

Kind of crazy our "big" right now is 6'7" Morgan. Even more crazy that he how he plays so much bigger than his height this year! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Or PG, wing, wing, stretch 4, stretch 4/5. Not many true centers left.

Absolutely. That’s why we may really have something if Morgan’s 3-pt shooting the other night wasn’t fools gold. With Morgan and Smith both being able to shoot it really opens up the offense and penetrating lanes for guys like RoJo, Newkirk, Green, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...