lillurk

Look, you can find a great coach with only one tourney run! The league titles in the A10 and the consecutive tournament qualifications are more important, but my point is are they enough to get considered for the job absent the other? I think they should be enough for consideration at least, pending other factors.

You’re proving my point. https://mobile.twitter.com/JohnGasaway/status/842354560161218560 They were about 31% to win at tip...so better than IU’s chances in Minnesota by a little, accounting for home court advantage: http://barttorvik.com/box.php?muid=400546900&year=2014. His best accomplishment was narrowly achieved, I’m not saying it was worthless.

And even if I was saying “take away his greatest single accomplishment to consider the candidate,” Stevens has two title game runs. So you drop the year he lost to Duke and still have a guy who made the title game. single tournament runs matter but track record (regular season and tournament success) matters much more. Ask Mike Davis or Porter Moses.

Actually I’m saying his “greatest accomplishment” hinges on Aaron Craft barely missing a floater. The fact that other schools would’ve considered him is poor justification: schools hire bad coaches constantly with weak processes. A single tournament run is not a lot to hang your hat on. Was Archie’s string of consistently making the tourney at Dayton enough to get a look absent three wins in March 2014?

A thought experiment: if Dayton lost either of its down-to-the-wire first weekend tournament games the year it went to the elite 8, is he even a candidate when IU is looking?

If he thinks this he’s correct (certainly once the season has begun and they couldn’t be easily replaced on this year’s roster). He has tools to lead with that he clearly isn’t using, and unlike last year, there are healthy alternatives you can reasonably expect to produce.

Not to mention that at least what’s described herein is immature but not worthy of dismissal.

Anyone who’s ever managed people has dealt with interpersonal challenges. Letting the problem fester (for years!) is the leader’s problem. He has plenty of power short of dismissal and at least the public-facing options like benching haven’t happened. He’s in charge, they’re his responsibility. If he can’t see that it’ll never work for him. (btw this is a good argument against letting captains be selected by their peers.)

Say what you will about this year’s team’s performance but he’d also inherit a level of talent he didn’t at Michigan.

Agreed. I’d love to be wrong. IU HC John Beilein would be great but I don’t think it’s realistic.

Agreed, although even with the injuries last year’s team should have made the tournament

This is a pretty productive game given the foul situation nonetheless.

Of course I understand the frustrations many have with Smith. But last night I really found myself hoping he sticks around next year, because you need a guy who can mark the Wieskamps, Livers, and Henrys of the world. Sometimes it takes awhile for a guy to put all that tantalizing potential into a powerhouse whole. He’s a much better fit at the 4, or if he’s at the 3 next to a 4/5 combo with at least one guy who’s a threat to hit a triple.

Yeah, even if you aren’t really trusting of efficiency margin this is one way it can be useful. The eye test says IU looks bad, and the efficiency numbers look at least as bad. If the eye test was unclear, but the underlying numbers were good (like Purdue, PSU, or MSU this year), it’d be easier to suspend judgment.

Could we have had him instead of Jake Forrester? Could we have had McKinley Wright instead of Clifton Moore if Arch had sort of soft-played re-recruiting him?

Yep, was hoping someone would do this.

You can complain about administrative support all you want but the budget is there and the cupboard wasn’t bare (and at this point the cupboard is definitely the new coach’s responsibility).

Frankly, I think an average high major new coach should get IU to the tournament in year 1 or 2 (unless they inherit a post-Sampson mess). Maybe the climb to the level of success and consistency has some ups and downs but programs change quickly in basketball.

Troy minus some shooting plus quite a bit of defense is a useful player.

Interesting — he’s a guy who *could* be that but isn’t now. He has strengths but right now he should be in a Troy Williams role with a bit less ball-handling, not a Robert Johnson one.

It’d be easier to stomach the idea of Alford if he admitted he made some bad choices...and if he had any track record of success.

Just for fun: Crean year four was Wat Shot and a s16. And from then on every Crean team save ‘14* was better than any Archie IU team yet based on Kenpom #s. *’14 would’ve been easier to stomach if the ‘13 season had ended more palatably. No shortage of evidence that basketball programs can turn around quickly. Coaches can change, and change their fortune...but this one hasn’t yet.

We all have our preferences, but as we also can surely agree, any defense or scheme can succeed when run well. Bennett’s dad creates and popularized the packline...I think part of it is Virginia has a better teacher. Brunk and Davis are poor fits athletically for the hard hedge-and-recover that Arch won’t abandon. I would have them play drop coverage and let the other forwards do the hard hedge. Even Virginia’s burliest guys have had better feet. As @Stuhoo points out, the closeouts are very bad — I wonder to what extent this is due to subliminally not trusting the 5s behind you, or worrying you’ll get Juwan/Trayce into foul trouble. I also don’t like UVA’s slow pace, but I wonder to what extent trying to push the ball makes the defensive scheme slightly harder.

A thought experiment: how would things be different if IU dropped the last three close games against MSU instead of winning them?

There’s a reason no NBA teams run a pack line defense. Sure, the B1G isn’t the league, but skilled players and coaches can beat it consistently in repeatable ways.