BGleas

Yes, please read the rest of the thread, I made several more comments to that affect.   

I don't know who will be the better player long-term between Vonleh and Parker, but the idea that Parker's "ceiling" is low because of his athleticism is ridiculous to me. The guy played one year of college basketball and was phenomenal for most of the year.    He's what? 19, maybe 20. A players ceiling isn't based just on pure athleticism. Parker can improve his NBA 3-pt shot, improve his ball handling, improve his post game, defense, shooting off the dribble, etc.    I'm not really arguing Parker vs. Vonleh, I'm pretty high on Vonleh's future, I more just find it ridiculous that they could say a guy as young as Parker has a low ceiling. I don't buy that. 

He definitely looks the part.

All for it, especially given the roster, as long as we can do it without leading the country in turnovers.

We've got to find a way to add a 5th year transfer. Another 6-man freshmen class, including 3 project bigs, could spell the end for Crean IMO.

To bad for the kid. Sucks when someone's career is taken by injuries.

I don't know how next year will turn out, we're talented but have a glaring hole on the interior. A hole so big I'm not sure how we'll compete in the Big Ten and we'll have to play a bit of a gimmick style probably. But, if IU disappoints again next year, part of what will disappoint me is that we will have basically wasted two of Yogi Farrell's four years with just one left to go.

Does he know any available and ready to contribute 2014 bigs?

Woops :)

How did we have him? I didn't even think Crean was recruiting him. Edit: I think it was a big mistake to not recruit him.

Last years team was a disaster, especially in terms of how it was constructed, no doubt. But, he also built the 11-12 and 12-13 teams from complete scratch. So to say he's pedestrian as a team builder isn't accurate IMO. We'll see how the next couple years play out, but IMO he's proven he can build very good teams. Add the Wade MU team and the James, McNeal, Matthews, etc team he built at MU that was also really good (remember he left MU right as that group was going to be seniors).

I can't remember where I read it, maybe it was earlier this thread, but there was talk of not officially hiring someone until after the recruiting dead period, so the selected one was still allowed to talk to players.

At some point your resume reflects your skill. Which we can use to promote and discredit Crean. But if Miles is the specific example, he had a great year last year, but his overall resume is ok, not terrible but not great either. 

If it's based on last season along, then I wouldn't put Crean in the top 100.   But, what does "up to date" mean? I would take that to mean there careers to date, not just last season. 

I see way too many flaws on this list to even begin to respond in defending Crean, and I'm not even the biggest Crean guy. Alford? McCaffrey? Pastner? Boyle? Miles? I could go on and on naming guys from their list who's resumes are worse or at best on-par with Crean's. 

I realize we're not actively going after Martin or Harris, was just bringing it up as a discussion point that I think someone like those guys makes more sense then going after another project big for getting a bigs sake.    Unless someone opens up because of a last minute coaching change, we're really limited in terms of getting anyone that could actually help next year. 

While a contributing big is the urgent need, I've been a proponent of going after Harris or Martin as well for the last spot. I think we're in "best available" mode, and a instant impact small forward actually would help the depth inside in an indirect way.    As presently constituted, I don't think we can get away with playing Hanner and Davis much together. That makes April our first/best big off the bench, that's scary to me. So IMO a lineup of Yogi, Blackmon, WIlliams, Davis, Hanner is out of the question.    Bring in a guy like Martin, who's instant impact and can start at the 3, pushes everyone down a spot on the depth chart. Then you go Yogi, Blackmon, Martin, WIlliams, Hanner and have a bench of Robinson, RoJo, Davis, Hoetzel.    While I don't love Davis at the 5, he's what we have off the bench right now and does give us the opportunity to play a certain style that could disrupt teams.   If a contributing big opens up somewhere, great! But if not, I think adding Martin for a one year impact makes complete sense. Way more sense then a 3rd project big. 

No worries, I can take it :) The Duke poster (sorry can't remember your handle off the top of my head) brought up a good point, let's discuss this as total jumpers, not just 3's. If you're really working on your perimeter game, you should be making at minimum 300 a day. I'd say closer to 400-500. Say 100 3's, 100 spot up mid-range jumpers and 100 mid-range jumpers on the move, you could do 100 off the dribble too. Then end it with 100 free throws. That's a legit workout. Maybe you don't do all of them each day, but mix it up different days to focus on different things.

I have to admit, when I said 500 3's a day, that is a bit much, I got carried away. Just wanted to say that.

All I'm saying is that if improving your 3-pt shot is your focus in an offseason, which is what I take from his post, then making 500 a week is nice, but isn't really working that hard at it. It's like the baseline, not really really putting in a ton of work.

I hear that. If his 100 3's are part of a much larger workout, where he's working on his mid-range game too, making say a few hundred mid-range shots and a hundred or so free throws, then that's working out.

I'm not trying to be negative, and I wouldn't call it extreme. I played D2 basketball and we were supposed to make 300 a day and our coach had a chart on his door we had to come sign each day, I'm assuming a guy with somewhat legit NBA potential would be able to do a little more.

Not trying to be negative, but he should be making 500 a day not 500 a week.

While of course your shoe/gear brand has very little to do with play on the court, IMO a benefit could come with cross-promotion opportunities if Vic and/or Zeller really do blow up in the NBA. I'm sure there would then be a little benefit to Jordan Brand to publicize both entities, The player and the connection to IU.

Missing the tournament every 5 years should get you fired at IU, unless there's a championship mixed in there too. IU should be one of those programs on selection Sunday where they say "Indiana is the #2 seed in the Midwest, making their 11th consecutive NCAA appearance".