Jump to content

IU W Over PSU Post Game Thread


Recommended Posts

38 minutes ago, BobSaccamanno said:

I am not sure why people are calling for Moore right now.  I am very bullish on his long term upside, but he’s probably overwhelmed right now.  It’s pretty obvious that Archie will play freshmen and Moore would play if he were ready.  I don’t buy into the idea that you hand minutes to anybody.  If Moore deserved to play, he would.  

What makes me wonder about this is the fact that Archie wasn’t giving Smith any minutes when it’s clear that he was ready to contribute, last night’s foul trouble notwithstanding.  From the Duke game through the Wisconsin game, the only game in which Smith played 10 or more minutes was the game against Youngstown State, where he got 11.  He got three minutes in the Wisconsin game, and couldn’t even get a single minute in the second half when the team was crapping its pants.  The leash Archie had on Smith before the Davis injury makes me wonder if Moore can’t also contribute, especially with how thin our front court is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 162
  • Created
  • Last Reply
47 minutes ago, BobSaccamanno said:

Good post, as usual.  It wasn’t pretty, but we did what we needed to get it done.  We played smart and rugged ball for the most part.  

This is just not a talented team.  In particular, they just cannot shoot the ball with range.  That limits our upside and I have accepted it.  

I have said all along, for IU to be any kind of a factor, we need Rob.  I think there were a couple of plays at least where he didn’t hustle enough.  That’s not good when you’re not having a good game. Having said that, I’ve seen too many second semester seniors really kick it into high gear, and I think Rob can.  

Green is another key guy.  He’s our other guard who is well rounded.  He has the ability to do anything out there, from shoot, to drive, to defend, to pass.  Newkirk is limited and Durham has become really shaky.  I think if Green just slows down mentally and gets careful with the ball, possession by possession, he can turn it on and be a critical factor in games, especially down the stretch.   I feel like he’s been rushed in the past, where he tries to do too much or loses focus.  

We all love McRoberts and rightfully so.  From a skill standpoint, he has tremendous hands. In addition to his hard nosed play and effort, the fact that his hands are like suction cups helps him just snag balls all over the place.  

Smith is getting his chance.  By everyone’s admission, he started to slip on his play but Archie pointed out how refreshed he was after the Christmas break.  His play against Minnesota was amazing but the consistency will be key. 

I am not sure why people are calling for Moore right now.  I am very bullish on his long term upside, but he’s probably overwhelmed right now.  It’s pretty obvious that Archie will play freshmen and Moore would play if he were ready.  I don’t buy into the idea that you hand minutes to anybody.  If Moore deserved to play, he would.  

You make an interesting points not about Green. Everyone remember he was our best player in preseason?

If we can get him going, along with getting some more consistency out of RoJo and Hartman shooting, we could actually have a really strong end to the season. 

Green

Johnson

McRoberts

Smith

Morgan

 

Hartman

Newkirk

Durham (sparingly)

McSwain (sparingly) 

 

That is a team that could really do damage in the conference based on things they've all shown at times. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bottom line for me is this....

 

Basketball is a team sport comprised of 5 guys on the floor at a time, and maybe 9-10 in all who realistically can/will contribute in any given game.

Realistically, it is going to be highly irregular that all the guys play well in the same game. The key to a good team is in having complimentary components to pick up the slack when one or two are playing poorly.

It is discouraging to see a senior struggle this year, in what should be his "moment". Not one of us knows what is going on in Rob's head. Yet, we have seen it time and again, kids this age are highly unpredictable. Like to think that he has matured through his process at IU, but again, different kids have different timetables..

Finally, and most importantly in my mind, is the fact that this team is developing a toughness to it and a mindset that it is willing to do the little things to help win a game. Most important to me is that I don't think we win this game last year. I am very pleased with the tone CAM is setting for his team, and the progress the team is making to incorporate that tone into it's makeup.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

Fair perspective. He clearly didn't have a strong offensive game. But he made key plays and played solid D that just as clearly helped us win. Some general thoughts from other observers:

"The Hoosiers moved the ball and moved the Nittany Lions so relentlessly that many, if not most, of their 27 3-point attempts were quality looks. Only six of them went down. It’s fair to wonder if this team will ever regain the shooting touch that had become so second nature in recent years." https://www.indystar.com/story/sports/college/indiana/2018/01/09/insider-hoosiers-respond-archie-miller-penn-state-win/1011759001/

- Rob was moving the ball well, no one outside of Morgan was hitting shots (outside shots, 6-27). The incessant need to critique's Rob's individual offensive woes takes a blind eye to what he was doing, with the other guys, moving the ball to the right places, which by the way reflected good decision making instead of "bone headed" bad drives into traffic, that helped get the W. It was an ugly win, but it was a win, against a good team that was playing good D including zone that our guys struggled with.

or

"Indiana’s defense also held Penn State to 1.01 points per possession, which is under the Nittany Lions’ conference average so far (1.06). And while the Hoosiers coughed it up more in the second half, they still only turned it over on just 13 percent of their possessions." http://www.insidethehall.com/2018/01/09/the-minute-after-penn-state-14/

Rob's D was a key part of this. This is not me being some kind of nutty RoJo fan, it's me appreciating the things he did to help get the W. Completely fair to be frustrated with his inconsistent offensive game (I am as well) -- but then we shot very poorly, as a team, against  good D, we still got looks but they didn't drop, and we still found the way to "gut out" the win, which Rob played a part in. To ignore his contributions while focusing only on his mistakes is, well, to ignore things.

 

His turnovers are boneheaded. The one last night where he was completely unaware of the PSU player coming from behind to tap the ball away from him, then was completely unaware that the PSU player was chasing down the loose ball behind him was boneheaded. I saw that coming from a mile away as it was happening. Some call that play lazy and question his effort, but that's not it. RoJo has done too much and as evidenced by his defense is clearly playing hard. What I think is that he has maybe the worst court awareness of any player I've seen in recent memory, especially for a senior. 

His turnovers typically come from being completely unaware of where he is on the court, and where the defense is. That's what is so frustrating with him, and why I call his turnover boneheaded. Generally they're not from being too aggressive or attacking, they're from simply not being aware. Things like catching the ball out of bounds. Not knowing a defender is coming from behind, etc., etc. 

As far as the offensive ball movement. Outside of that stretch late in the first half when PSU tightened the screws defensively, it was really good. Yes, RoJo was a part of that. I've praised him for not forcing bad shots even though his shooting isn't there. I actually really respect that he hasn't forced his offense this year given his struggles. He's handling that in a really mature way. Many other senior guards might go into "get mine" mode or try and force a ton of shots to get them going, and he hasn't done that. 

It's just a difficult situation. I agree with much of what you say about RoJo. The issue is, he isn't a sophomore or a freshmen. Green and AL get away without criticism sometimes because of their youth. RoJo is a 4-year starter. People expect more from a 4-year starter, and this team is a reliable shooter away from being a really good team, but he just hasn't been able to get it going. If you raised the 3-pt percentage to even something like 38% and limited the careless, unforced turnovers, I'd say he's having a great season. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

Winning covers for alot of things.  Lose and your flaws are criticized, win and people over look it.  Everyone gives McBob a complete pass for not being able to score, ever, because he hustles almost at all times, is a good rebounder and defender and like hartman, is in the right place alot..  But the guy didn't shoot once last night in a 26 minutes of play.  Not one shot.  And Robs play doesn't matter if that is his only bad play of the night or if he guy get 4 points or he doesn't have 6 TOs.  Rob just isn't playing well.  Doesn't mean we won't win, just means he may need to come off the bench, might help his game

Oh the intangibles. The hardest thing to value in sports. 

If we let last night slip away, i'm willing to bet that the majority of finger pointing would be at Rob. Turnovers are glaring and maybe we as fans have to let go of our expectations for him. He's asked to do a lot and is ultimately an inconsistent player. Doesn't mean that he doesn't have value...it just means that he's not who we want him to be. (I sound like Denny Green).

McBob may get a pass, but I'm not seeing many argue that we are a worse team when he is on the floor. And that's what it all should come down to, right? But i would like to argue that his offensive contributions are actually under-rated. How many second chances do we get because of McBob? How many fast-breaks result from his steals. How many of his passes lead to assists? He may have had no shots, but he's not a ghost out there. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

Oh the intangibles. The hardest thing to value in sports. 

If we let last night slip away, i'm willing to bet that the majority of finger pointing would be at Rob. Turnovers are glaring and maybe we as fans have to let go of our expectations for him. He's asked to do a lot and is ultimately an inconsistent player. Doesn't mean that he doesn't have value...it just means that he's not who we want him to be. (I sound like Denny Green).

McBob may get a pass, but I'm not seeing many argue that we are a worse team when he is on the floor. And that's what it all should come down to, right? But i would like to argue that his offensive contributions are actually under-rated. How many second chances do we get because of McBob? How many fast-breaks result from his steals. How many of his passes lead to assists? He may have had no shots, but he's not a ghost out there. 

I agree completely with what you have to say here.  Winning makes the pill easier to swallow.  And although i was hard on McBob earlier, i am on board with his playing more minutes.  But with that said, you can't have a starter (26+) minutes not take shots or go to the hole.  It allows the other team to hedge more aggressively, try for steals more, and double down as needed because he isn't going to shoot.  This could contribute to RoJo or Hartman not getting the open 3 looks on the extra pass.  Don;t get me wrong, we are better with him on the floor, but his lack of scoring threat changes how a team can defend us, and 5 on 4 will win out with team that we are not even or less talented than. 

Just my thoughts as a casual basketball observer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

 

McBob may get a pass, but I'm not seeing many argue that we are a worse team when he is on the floor. And that's what it all should come down to, right? But i would like to argue that his offensive contributions are actually under-rated. How many second chances do we get because of McBob? How many fast-breaks result from his steals. How many of his passes lead to assists? He may have had no shots, but he's not a ghost out there. 

There was a play yesterday, I believe we were up 2 or 3 points, that it looked like PSU had an easy offense rebound and a layup. Easily could have turned into an And 1 because of where our guys were but McRoberts came out of no where, got the rebound and ended up getting fouled. Then we came down and drilled a three to extend the lead. All that shows up as is a rebound, but in reality it was a big swing. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

I agree completely with what you have to say here.  Winning makes the pill easier to swallow.  And although i was hard on McBob earlier, i am on board with his playing more minutes.  But with that said, you can't have a starter (26+) minutes not take shots or go to the hole.  It allows the other team to hedge more aggressively, try for steals more, and double down as needed because he isn't going to shoot.  This could contribute to RoJo or Hartman not getting the open 3 looks on the extra pass.  Don;t get me wrong, we are better with him on the floor, but his lack of scoring threat changes how a team can defend us, and 5 on 4 will win out with team that we are not even or less talented than. 

Just my thoughts as a casual basketball observer. 

For a few games team did this, and those are the games he scored close to double digits and hit some threes. Teams stopped leaving him alone because he proved he could score, and that's why his scoring has gone back down. 

He is only going to shoot when he is left open or has to because of the clock, and that's okay as long as he does it then. No problem with a guy not taking contested shots. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

For a few games team did this, and those are the games he scored close to double digits and hit some threes. Teams stopped leaving him alone because he proved he could score, and that's why his scoring has gone back down. 

He is only going to shoot when he is left open or has to because of the clock, and that's okay as long as he does it then. No problem with a guy not taking contested shots. 

I get it.  And as i said i not saying his play on the floor isn't needed.  I just don't like having a guy played 26 minutes and didn't take one shot.  But its unaccpetable to be on the floor for almost 30 minutes and not take a shot.  And he is always a pass first guy.  If this is what you want from him, move him to the point and allow Al or Green to play the 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

I get it.  And as i said i not saying his play on the floor isn't needed.  I just don't like having a guy played 26 minutes and didn't take one shot.  But its unaccpetable to be on the floor for almost 30 minutes and not take a shot.  And he is always a pass first guy.  If this is what you want from him, move him to the point and allow Al or Green to play the 2

To be honest, I wonder how he would be at the point?  To me it would be worth a shot(no pun intended).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, rico said:

To be honest, I wonder how he would be at the point?  To me it would be worth a shot(no pun intended).

His handles need some work but it might work.  He is always looking to pass to someone, this might either open him up for some shots or allow Al, Green, and RoJo to shoot or drive to the hole.  I guess at some point it can't hurt to try

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

His handles need some work but it might work.  He is always looking to pass to someone, this might either open him up for some shots or allow Al, Green, and RoJo to shoot or drive to the hole.  I guess at some point it can't hurt to try

Kinda of my thinking as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On another note. Anybody thinking we got lucky last night by benefitting from the officiating? Penn St. got some bad calls and momentum changers. 

Usually, my head is so wrapped up in IU it's easy for me to overlook and 'home treatment' we may be getting, but a couple of times last night I was a little surprised about some of the calls/lack of calls. 

Not complaining though...I'll take it. Penn St. is a solid team. Although ugly I think we'll look back at this as a great win.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, tdhoosier said:

On another note. Anybody thinking we got lucky last night by benefitting from the officiating? Penn St. got some bad calls and momentum changers. 

Usually, my head is so wrapped up in IU it's easy for me to overlook and 'home treatment' we may be getting, but a couple of times last night I was a little surprised about some of the calls/lack of calls. 

Not complaining though...I'll take it. Penn St. is a solid team. Although ugly I think we'll look back at this as a great win.

 

Couldn't disagree more. We didn't even get into the bonus in the second half until Penn State started fouling to conserve time. Penn State was in the bonus way earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, milehiiu said:

So much has been said both last year, and for the better part of this year, as to how many turnovers IU commits.  I think not enough has been said about IU limiting the number of turnovers to 9 against PSU.  And only 2 turnovers in the first half.  In fact Robert Johnson alone was guilty of committing 4 of the 9 total turnovers.

 

Turnovers, free throws and team balance were the reason we won. Turnovers were particularly important cosidering that PSU leads the conference in steals at 9/ game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

On another note. Anybody thinking we got lucky last night by benefitting from the officiating? Penn St. got some bad calls and momentum changers. 

Usually, my head is so wrapped up in IU it's easy for me to overlook and 'home treatment' we may be getting, but a couple of times last night I was a little surprised about some of the calls/lack of calls. 

Not complaining though...I'll take it. Penn St. is a solid team. Although ugly I think we'll look back at this as a great win.

 

I thought the opposite. Carr gets away with more hooks and push offs than anyone I've seen this season. There were some bad calls both ways, but I thought it benefited PSU. Not to mention the stoppages at the end definitely helps the team trailing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, rico said:

To be honest, I wonder how he would be at the point?  To me it would be worth a shot(no pun intended).

I don't think it would work for a few reasons...

1) His handles aren't remotely good enough. He handles it fine when he's dribbling around the perimeter, but he gets very shaky in traffic

2) He doesn't have the handle to penetrate. You'd lose any instance of a point guard getting into the lane and finishing

3) Point guards are typically responsible for getting back on defense when a shot goes up. At minimum you don't really want your point guard crashing the offense glass in case the other team gets a run out. You'd basically remove one of McRobert's top assets, his offensive rebounding. 

I think he's in the perfect role for him. He just needs to find a way to get a couple shots up a game, that are within the flow of the offense, to keep the defense honest. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, BGleas said:

I don't think it would work for a few reasons...

1) His handles aren't remotely good enough. He handles it fine when he's dribbling around the perimeter, but he gets very shaky in traffic

2) He doesn't have the handle to penetrate. You'd lose any instance of a point guard getting into the lane and finishing

3) Point guards are typically responsible for getting back on defense when a shot goes up. At minimum you don't really want your point guard crashing the offense glass in case the other team gets a run out. You'd basically remove one of McRobert's top assets, his offensive rebounding. 

I think he's in the perfect role for him. He just needs to find a way to get a couple shots up a game, that are within the flow of the offense, to keep the defense honest. 

He's not initiating the offense, he's not orchestrating plays, he's playing an off-ball role which is largely rebounding and defense-driven. He's not a point guard by any measure, and as much as I like what he's doing as a glue guy, I don't see anything to turn him into a point guard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hoosierhoopster said:

He's not initiating the offense, he's not orchestrating plays, he's playing an off-ball role which is largely rebounding and defense-driven. He's not a point guard by any measure, and as much as I like what he's doing as a glue guy, I don't see anything to turn him into a point guard.

Agree. It would pretty much eliminate all of his strengths and highlight all of his weaknesses. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

On another note. Anybody thinking we got lucky last night by benefitting from the officiating? Penn St. got some bad calls and momentum changers. 

Usually, my head is so wrapped up in IU it's easy for me to overlook and 'home treatment' we may be getting, but a couple of times last night I was a little surprised about some of the calls/lack of calls. 

Not complaining though...I'll take it. Penn St. is a solid team. Although ugly I think we'll look back at this as a great win.

 

Mostly i thought we go away with more body contact around the rim than they did.  Otherwise, it was a decent home court officiated game.  Nothing i saw that pushed the game one way or another.  Not nearly as bad as say Wisc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, BGleas said:

I don't think it would work for a few reasons...

1) His handles aren't remotely good enough. He handles it fine when he's dribbling around the perimeter, but he gets very shaky in traffic

2) He doesn't have the handle to penetrate. You'd lose any instance of a point guard getting into the lane and finishing

3) Point guards are typically responsible for getting back on defense when a shot goes up. At minimum you don't really want your point guard crashing the offense glass in case the other team gets a run out. You'd basically remove one of McRobert's top assets, his offensive rebounding. 

I think he's in the perfect role for him. He just needs to find a way to get a couple shots up a game, that are within the flow of the offense, to keep the defense honest. 

I can agree with this.  I would just love for him to get about 8 points a game to go with his steals and boards.  He gets alot of defensive boards but not many offensive with put backs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IowaHoosierFan said:

I can agree with this.  I would just love for him to get about 8 points a game to go with his steals and boards.  He gets alot of defensive boards but not many offensive with put backs.

He get's a lot of offensive rebounds, it's just that many are the kind where he comes flying in and lands off balance so throw it out, or they're the tip back variety where he's not really in a position to put it back. But yes, I agree with your general point. He has to at least look at the basket at times. He has to be some semblance of the threat. I think 8 points is a bit much, but taking zero shots and not even looking at the basket needs to change as we move along. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, BGleas said:

I don't think it would work for a few reasons...

1) His handles aren't remotely good enough. He handles it fine when he's dribbling around the perimeter, but he gets very shaky in traffic

2) He doesn't have the handle to penetrate. You'd lose any instance of a point guard getting into the lane and finishing

3) Point guards are typically responsible for getting back on defense when a shot goes up. At minimum you don't really want your point guard crashing the offense glass in case the other team gets a run out. You'd basically remove one of McRobert's top assets, his offensive rebounding. 

I think he's in the perfect role for him. He just needs to find a way to get a couple shots up a game, that are within the flow of the offense, to keep the defense honest. 

I don't know if it would work either.  But we just haven't had anybody step into that PG spot and take control.  I always think back to the 78-79 season when we didn't have a true point.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, rico said:

I don't know if it would work either.  But we just haven't had anybody step into that PG spot and take control.  I always think back to the 78-79 season when we didn't have a true point.  

Agree with you and BGleas.  Lack of PG and outside shooting ARE the big problems this team has not overcome all year.  Are we now turning a corner?  Too early to tell.  Still need to see W against NW to say that may be happening.  Rojo, McB, Al just don't have the handle for PG.  Looks like we sink or swim this year with following lineup:

PG:  Newark, Greene

SG:  Rojo, McBOB then Hartman 6th man

4/5:  Smith/Morgan 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, BGleas said:

He get's a lot of offensive rebounds, it's just that many are the kind where he comes flying in and lands off balance so throw it out, or they're the tip back variety where he's not really in a position to put it back. But yes, I agree with your general point. He has to at least look at the basket at times. He has to be some semblance of the threat. I think 8 points is a bit much, but taking zero shots and not even looking at the basket needs to change as we move along. 

It's kind of like some teams do with their bigs.  If they have a big that is somewhat competent shooting the 3, they'll pull them out on the perimeter early just to make sure the defense knows they can't leave them out there.  Even if they miss the shots, the other team knows they're willing to shoot it so they'll be out on them a little more.

We saw it last night with Morgan.  It didn't look intentional, he just happened to be in the right place at the right time and found himself open, but it makes the defense respect him.

Even if he doesn't hit a lot of shots, McRoberts has to start putting up at least a couple shots a game just to keep his defender honest.

Otherwise I'd tell whoever was guarding him to double Morgan any time he got the ball within 10 feet of the basket.  Then have nobody help off onto McRoberts unless he's going in for an uncontested layup.  Let him have a wide open 3 and recover because everybody knows he isn't going to shoot it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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




×
×
  • Create New...