BGleas

Orlando was definitely good, and agree on VanGundy's system to fit that team, but again the Celtics took them 7 games that year without KG. They took them 7 games with Glen Davis starting and Brian Scalabrine playing 23 mpg in that series. Boston wins that series and goes to the Finals if KG never gets hurt. Agree on the Lakers as well. If KG never gets hurt, I'd say those two play three years in a row in the Finals. I think the Celtics definitely win two of those, as they came super close to winning in 2010 even with KG's and Perk's injuries (IIRC the Celtics were actually up 10 in the 4th in LA in Game 7, they just ran out of gas). But agree, I can't see Kobe getting swept in 3 straight Finals. I'm clearly biased, but I think it'd be hard to argue that those Celtics don't win two if KG hadn't hurt his knee. For me at least, it's interesting to think about how Pierce is viewed if he has 2 titles, and potentially 2 Finals MVP's (though of course no guarantee he would have been MVP the second time)?

The G-League has made great strides over the last few years, and I believe next year all 30 teams will have an affiliate. I think it's ready now and we're already seeing it's impact. The advent of the 2-way contracts was a big deal that has not only improved the G-League, but made it easier for those fringe guys to latch onto NBA teams. I'll use the Celtics as an example since I'm most familiar with them, but with the 2-way contracts both Tremont Waters and Taco Fall are guys that the Celtics now have an investment in. The organization is much more invested in their development than they would have been 5 years ago, and 5 years ago those two probably never see an NBA court, but with the new contract rules with the G-League both saw NBA time last season. You can make the same case for Juwan Morgan. 5 years ago he probably never sees an NBA court, but since he was able to secure a 2-way deal initially with the Jazz (I think that's what he initially had, could be wrong) they're now much more invested in him. Now, he gets called up when there are injuries, whereas 5 years ago they probably go outside the org for that. I think the 2-way deals and the NBA dropping the 1st round contract commitment from 4 years to 2 years, has really made leaving early when you're not a first round lock much more viable. Teams aren't as invested in 1st round picks as they used to be and it's actually made 2nd round picks and undrafted guys more valuable because a guy drafted 5th in the second round doesn't have a contract much different than a guy drafted 27th in the 1st round.

If they do change the rule back, everything will be different this time. The league and society in general with social media, etc., is much better set up to support it. These guys now have marketability coming right out of high school. They have millions of followers on social media platforms, so they're not unknown entities now. Then you add in how the G-League has evolved over the last 3 or so years, and now for example you won't have Kendrick Perkins playing in just 14 games his rookie and mostly being in a suit on the end of the bench. You'll have that kid starting on your G-League team for development and fans getting to know him by following their G-League affiliate on twitter, facebook, etc., and there will be a ton of excitement when he gets called up due to an injury or something. The entire landscape is different.

Paul is my favorite. People forget everything he went through with the stabbing early in his career and how he bounced back from that. He's a warrior. But yes, it's a shame he went so long with no help. Unfortunately for me, I left the team for a different job two years before the '08 title. I still maintain that if KG hadn't gotten hurt the year after their championship (08-09), that group would have won at least 2 if not 3 titles. They were 28-3 when KG hurt his knee and missed the rest of that season, and he was never really the same when he came back the next year. They would have beaten Orlando in the '09 playoffs that year (they took them 7 games even without KG) and they took LA 7 games in the Finals the next year with a hobbled KG and Perkins blowing out his knee in Game 6 of that series.

Gotta go with this as one of my favorites. I was working in the Celtics PR Department at the time and that day someone on our scoring crew couldn't make the game so I filled in. I was the scorekeeper for the game and if you look at the scorers table right after he releases the shot, my seat was right about where the F is in "Foundation" is at the table. I know most of you are probably Pacers fans, but for a Celtics fan/someone working for the team it was such an amazing moment watching that unfold so close to the action!

One thing that doesn't get talked about enough, and I can tell you this was definitely a big piece of it as I was working in a front office during this time period that drafted 3 straight from high school players, that the change to the one and done rule wasn't really that much about gambling on kids that didn't pan out. To be honest, a high percentage of the high school kids did pan out, depending on your definition of "panning out". It was mainly about two factors, one that gets talked about a lot which was David Stern not really wanting NBA scouts and GM's in high school gyms, and one that rarely gets talked about, though was one of the biggest driving forces for the one and done rule was NBA teams we're struggling to sell these kids to season ticket holders and prospective sponsors once it became 5-6+ high school kids per year. NBA teams in the lottery and even outside the lottery are selling the future and hope to their season ticket holders and prospective sponsors. But, this was when Facebook was in its infancy and just for college kids, Twitter and YouTube weren't even a thing, and there certainly wasn't Tik Tok or SnapChat. Teams couldn't sell Martell Webster, Dorrell Wright, Gerald Green, Desagana Diop, Kendrick Perkins, DeShawn Stevenson, JR Smith, etc. These kids weren't being promoted on twitter, youtube, tik tok, etc. NBA teams were struggling to sell their first round picks that nobody had heard of to season ticket holders and sponsors. A huge piece of the one and done rule was to get the free marketing and promotion that the NCAA provides these kids. Now, the Atlanta Hawks can sell Trey Young and Cam Reddish to their community. RJ Barrett spending a season at Duke was huge for the Knicks ability to sell him. It goes on and on.

A bit of an interesting one here, my first memory of Indiana basketball is watching the 1987 Championship game. I was 8 years old and we lived near Philadelphia and guess what? I rooting for Syracuse. I didn’t know anything about Indiana and as a kid in Big East Country I loved Derrick Coleman, Sherman Douglas and Stevie Thompson. Little did I know that literally less than two months after watching that game, my parents would announce to us that we were moving to Indianapolis. The rest is history. Fell in love with IU basketball almost immediately, following Calbert and that entire class, and then especially when as a ball boy for our high school team, I got to ball boy and sit under the hoop when our high school played Damon Bailey at Butler, played at The Wig Wam, and played at Lawrence North against Montross and those guys.

Completely agree. Again, assuming no major or unexpected changes, next year is about being a real, consistent threat in the conference. Like you said, maybe not competing to win it outright, though who knows if Lander is able to product right off the bat and we're healthy, but most likely being somewhere in that 3-5 range IMO would be a really nice step forward.

You can't really use the tournament as a barometer, at least at this point. There are too many variables and unknowns. What if we win 23 games, lose in the first round of the BTT but then make a Sweet Sixteen? Are you firing him? What if they win 26 games, lose in the BTT Final and then lose in the 2nd round of the NCAA? Firing him? What if they win 21 games, win 2 BTT games and then make an Elite run? Are you firing him? Does he have to hit all of your criteria? Just one? 2 out of 3? What Archie needs to do is continue to show progress and improvement. The team has improved every season under Archie, though I fully admit the improvements have been incremental, with no huge leaps. I do agree it is time, especially if you have the bulk of the roster (including TJD) returning and you're adding a kid like Lander for a more substantial leap. But to put actual win parameters (25 games, specific # of tournament wins, etc.) is setting yourself up to paint yourself into a corner. Continued improvement and progress is what Archie needs to do.

Just looking at his stats his first two seasons, his shooting percentages make IU’s current guards look like Steph Curry. Last year (edit: unfortunately by "last year" I meant this year) he was 37% from the field and 30% from 3, which were both improvements from his freshmen year.

Yes to Spring sports, but not Winter. There is a trickle down effect. Does everyone currently in college get a 5th season or just the seniors? What about the sophomore coming off the bench that is anticipating a larger role his last two seasons, but now the senior he’s played behind is coming back for a 5th season? Does that player get an added year of eligibility? Look at MSU, Rocket Watts has been waiting behind Cassius Winston, does Watts get an extra year because now Winston is coming back and he has to wait another year? I just think this is one of those things that stinks for everyone, but is what it is.

Yes, certainly not important at the moment given the grand scheme of what’s going on, but with that said if the college basketball season is over I will consider this team a tournament team on Archie’s resume.

That's probably the difference, I'm under no illusion that we're going to actually win the entire BTT. I think a semi's appearance would be an homerun of a performance for IU, and IMO the best path for that is the 11 seed. Your last sentence is also why I don't mind the 11 seed. While a win over NW/Neb in of itself doesn't mean much, any win that gets IU to 20 or 21 wins is a huge win regardless of the opponent. Just getting to either of those win totals is huge for locking the Tournament bid and seeding. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to lose tomorrow and get the 11 seed, I want IU to get to 10-10 and then at that point I think the 11 seed is the better path for this team.

I actually like the 11 seed draw much better, so I'm good with that.

Completely agree on all fronts. I'm a youth travel and AAU coach as well, and I don't really have any plays and actually do very few drills in practice. The majority of what we do in practice are game-based play or small-sided games to teach the kids how to play the game. Then we run various forms of motion, etc. Agree on the talent too. You hit on this all of the time and I agree with you, but IU needs "guys". TJD is really the only guy this roster has that does much that actually stands out. He's our only legit, elite guy. The best teams need 2-3 of those guys and then you surround them with your Phinisee's, Race Thompson's, Armaan Franklin's, etc. IU's problem is too many of the latter and not enough of the former. I don't know how much of an impact a reclassified Lander can have as a freshman, and I know there are some mixed reviews on his play this season, but I also know in watching his highlights (yes, I know you have to take highlight reels with a grain of salt) that from the guard position he brings moves, quickness and finishing at the rim that nobody on the roster currently has. Not saying he's remotely as talented as these guys, but he has those NBA type moves off the ball screen that Westbrook, Irving, Morant, etc. have. Those hesitation dribbles, inside/out dribbles, glide dribble into a stepback, etc. Again (crystal clear), I'm not saying he's as talented as those guys, but he has those moves from what I've seen, and if they translate to college quickly, we'll then have 2 legit, elite guys. But yes, IU does need a talent upgrade. I believe it's happening with Lander, TJD, hopefully Kauffman, and you still have Hunter's development and finally getting a full summer to focus on basketball, a wildcard like Geronimo, etc. While I still think Archie can improve the recruiting, I also believe long gone will be the days of guys like Devonte Green, Al Durham, Clifton Moore, etc. etc. Not to bash those guys, but IU needs and should be recruiting better than those guys, and I believe Archie is.

I think some of that is a Romeo issue too though. Watch the Celtics sometime, he basically does the same exact thing. He runs right to the corner and just stands there for most possessions, rarely ever getting involved in the offense or even touching the ball. You could argue that that is what his role is with the Celtics, but when Jevonte Green plays (same role/position as Romeo) the dude is flying all over the court and getting himself involved. As far as the offense in general, again IMO it's a personnel issue largely. Want to hang that on Archie? Sure, I have no problem with that and somewhat agree (though I do agree with Old Friend on the upperclassmen issue), but I'm not worried the scheme at all. We need Hunter to develop, more guards like Lander and we need bigs that can space the floor. Our offense is clunky because we don't have great shooters and we don't have a single big that can stretch the floor. Outside of personnel additions, the biggest thing that can happen for IU heading into next season is Race specifically, and TJD as well, developing outside shots. Late in that Illinois game, Race had the ball at the top of the key numerous times and his man didn't even come outside of the free throw line. He just stood in the middle of the paint. The offense looks completely different if Race can confidently knock down that shot, same with TJD. All of the sudden the driving lanes are wide open for Phinisee, Durham, Lander, Leal, Galloway, Franklin, etc.

Completely agree. I could be wrong, but I think the best case scenario for IU is to finish 10-10 in the conference (that's really the huge key obviously) but be in that 11 seed game. While beating Neb/NW specifically doesn't exactly help IU, getting to 21 wins certainly would, and then as you said you're in the better side of the bracket.

I'll agree and disagree. I agree that IU needs more talent and it needs more veteran talent. To Old Friend's point, our veterans are average-to-below average Big Ten players and that has really hurt IU. Fleek has said the same thing, we need more "guys". We need more TJD's, more Lander's, etc. But with that said, you act like Archie designs an offense to purposely have the defense pack the paint? It's not like Archie is saying, "hey guys, here's what we'll do offensively, we'll pack the paint ourselves so that we close off all of our own driving lanes!" We need shooters and talent to open up the offense. We need good, talented upperclassmen. Those things are coming.

I thought it over. You’re wrong, I’m right.

This is one of the more confusing threads I’ve ever seen. I don’t understand the dispute? Yes, you need a good coach, you need a good team system, and you need good and great players.

Pulling for Colgate. A kid from my town in PA is a freshmen on their team.

So, we all agree that we like good players? Is that what we're arguing about?

It’s actually 3 of the last 4. IU played very well in the Iowa game too.

Just my opinion, but I think this season is way more about building trust in the fan base and building program momentum going forward, as opposed to what happens in the tournament. This is one year where I want IU to finish the regular season and BTT as strongly as they possibly can and get as high a seed as possible, even if that means being an 8-seed in that 8/9 matchup and potentially facing a 1 seed in the second round. IMO, an 11 seed means IU stumbled over these last 4 games and in the BTT. We need program momentum right now more than anything else.

It also still doesn't answer why we keep playing Smith out of position? College coaches break promises all the time. They lie during recruiting all the time. Why would Archie feel like this one promise has to be kept while the house burns down around him? Tell Smith it was a fun experiment, but it hasn't worked out and that he's going back to the 4 because that's where the team needs him. Simple as that.