BGleas

Sort of. You have to qualify for Districts, which is based on how you do during the season, both league and non-conference. Each district then gets a certain number of teams (it can vary by district) into the state playoffs, based on how they finish in the district playoffs. For example, in your earlier post you said Butler would play the #5 team from District 3. That means the team that finished in 5th place in the District 3 Tournament (yes, they actually have consolation games).

No problem! Yes, the state playoffs start next Saturday, which Butler has qualified for. The brackets actually just came out this afternoon. The neighboring town from me, where my buddy is the assistant actually got matched up in the first round against the team that just beat Butler in their District finals.

^^^^You bolden it, but just to be clear for this skimming, this was still the District playoffs (think sectionals in Indiana), not the state tournament. The last bolder section (PIAA Tournament) is the state playoffs. I’ll have to look up who the #5 team is in District 3 is. I’m in Disctrict 3amd a few of our local teams in our league made it. A former teammate of mine is the assistant at one of our Distrct 3 schools that made it. They have a crazy good point guard who is on the low-major D1/D2 borderline. Really good player, would be a good matchup.

I know Easton, I’m probably about an hour and a half from there, maybe a little closer. The state title games are played at HersheyPark. They have a stadium there that seats a little over 10K. I’m about 20-30 minutes from Hershey.

This was a District playoff game (I think Sectionals in Indiana is the comparison) in PA. The state tournament begins next week. I live in PA, though not close to Pittsburgh. I'm about 25 minutes away from where the State Title games are played. Hoping to catch them if Butler makes the finals.

Yup. Heck, if IU was irrelevant then this article never would have been written. The fact that this article exists shows that IU basketball is extremely relevant. You don't see articles like this about Boston College, Wake Forrest, Minnesota, Cal, etc.

I have no idea what Stevens intentions are, but I can tell you the Celtics are not firing him. Danny and Wyc (the owner) love him and as I said, they don't make moves because of fan pressure. I worked for the team from 01-06 and the last two years fans were screaming for Doc Rivers to get fired. It was never even close to being considered. Danny and Wyc loved him and believed in him. Two years later with a better roster Doc coached them to a title. As far as the Celtics, no there is no rebuild. It will be an interesting summer though. The Celtics have a ton of assets and will be targeting Anthony Davis and Durant. The big issue though is Kyrie Irving. While he committed to resigning in Boston before the season, that seems to be much less of a certainty now. He doesn't seem too happy right now, but the problem is you need Kyrie to get Davis and/or Durant. Davis and/or Durant don't come without Kyrie being there. So, if Kyrie does leave then where does that leave the Celtics? Obviously you then keep Tatum/Brown and you have a ton of quality draft picks, but at that point you're probably not a true contender anymore. Boston/Kyrie are really the linchpin of the summer NBA market right now. But, two things 1) I'd be stunned if Stevens isn't the Celtics coach anymore and 2) Archie isn't going anywhere anyways.

If we have Phinisee and Race all year, IU is a lock tournament team.

Agree on Smith tonight. He played under control for the most part tonight was active and confident around the basket with the ball, and generally played hard. Maybe getting benched the second half at Iowa had an impact. Also, I’m really happy with what Race is giving. That kid is a smart, active, tough player, and it really changes things when you have both Smith and Race. It gives Archie options that he didn’t have before if Smith was struggling. The impact of the Phinisee concussion on this season was huge. He was really just beginning to really build his confidence before he went down, and just now the last two games looks like he’s back on track.

I've tried to go back and find the tweet and can't, but over the weekend I saw a tweet from one of the UK recruiting site writers and he listed UK's top targets (it was either regardless of class or just 19/20) and he had Brooks at 6th or 7th on the list. I wish I could find it, and of course that doesn't mean that's what Cal's priority list is, but it speaks to Brooks wanting to go where he's needed.

This. And As Old Friend posted last night, IU has nobody who can do that. Also, if you rewatch the three that tied it in regulation, Green completely relaxed and got turned around defensively and lost Bohannon. It was horrible. How you relax on a game-defining play like that when defending the one guy you don’t want to lose track of is inexplicable.

Because Crean had tons of transfers the last several years. Not completely sure, but I don't think NBA defections hurt you in the APR the same way transfers do.

This is not a sour grapes post if IU loses Brooks, of course we'd love to have him, and caveat that I'm just going off the above highlight clip of McNeil, but if Brooks is really set on being a 1 and done, then if this kid could perform/shoot at the Big Ten level even remotely close to what he's doing in JUCO, then he might actually be a better fit (2-3 years of him). Long shot since IU seems in late, but maybe the Dayton connections pay off. The grand slam would be Brooks picks IU and we get McNeil. Again, I'm just going off the one clip, no idea if he translates to this level, but in the clip he looks like a gamer with 'in the gym' range. IU could use some of that.

Thanks, V05! To add to this, if everyone develops the way you'd hope and guys stay, and of course Brooks goes our way, I think in two years (20-21) the below actually looks a lot like an Archie team, and it looks pretty good to me. Add in some other signings and that's a long, athletic, skilled team. Phinisee (Jr) Brooks (So) Hunter (RS So) Thompson (RS Jr) TDJ (So) Bench Durham (Sr) Smith (Sr, though I'd guess he might not be here) Franklin (So) Forrester (Jr) Add in 2020 guys (maybe a big and a guard) and this is a nice team with a lot of versatile pieces.

I think if approached correctly, this is a fascinating topic and one I've thought about as well. I don't know the answer to the question, but I would guess a good way to find out would be to watch some Dayton film on YouTube his last 3-4 seasons there. Being completely honest, I didn't watch a ton of Dayton when Miller was there, but I do remember watching their Elite 8 run and I really liked watching that run. This is completely on recollection, but what I recall is a really long, tough, together team. A team of guys that played with emotion, that you could tell were all on the same page, we're all long, athletic, and well-built, and all knew what they should be doing and where they should be doing it. They weren't one of those mid-major teams winning in the tournament because they got hot from 3 and got lucky. They appeared to have clear leadership, guys that came through in big moments, and like they belonged in that spot. I remember them playing like they were mad that the rest of us didn't think they belonged. With all that said, I don't see that in the recruits Archie is bringing to IU so far. I don't remember his Dayton teams (again, I didn't watching closely) having these sleepy types that don't play with emotion. To be fair though, as others have said, we've really yet to see Race or Hunter play, Langford was a 'must-recruit', and Fitzner doesn't fit what I remember him having at Dayton. I think the jury is still out on Forrester obviously, though he doesn't seem like a guy he had at Dayton. I think Damezi actually does kind of fit what Archie had at Dayton, but again Damezi is a guy you're probably not expecting to be fully what he is until probably his junior year. Phinisee is another guy that I think maybe fits what Archie likes, but again I wonder about his demanour. I love that he's cool, calm and collected, but I think Archie generally likes more fiery guys. Of course, the goal isn't to just mirror Dayton, it's to improve upon it. If I'm being honest, I'm not sure if what Archie is doing so far at IU really mirrors the type of team he really wants or has had. I don't think he's even remotely like Crean though. Archie is being very intentional with his offers, and to be fair to Archie we have to give 'his guys' 3-4 years to develop before we really know. He's had 1 class to this point, so it's really too early to judge them. I do wonder if the "inside/out" approach has gotten to be too much of a mantra. I'm all for locking the borders, I really am, but has he gotten a few guys he typically might not have gone after because of that mantra?

One thing Danny Ainge and Wyc Grousbeck don’t do is fire coaches because of fan pressure. There is absolutely no way they would even entertain firing Stevens, they love him.

Awesome, awesome win! I know people hate hearing about injuries, but for all the “where has this team been”, it’s been where Phinisee, Green and Davis have been. Over this 7-game losing streak not having Davis was huge. Without him banging with Ward IU loses this game. Imagine having him against Maryland when Fernando was killing us and UMD was crushing IU on the offensive glass. Other examples of IU getting killed inside over this stretch as well This team also hasn’t had both Phinisee AND Green together in about 5 weeks. Green’s best stretches today were when he was able to slide to the 2 and play with Phinisee. IU hasn’t had that luxury in 5 weeks. The options are so much great when both those guys are available.

When I worked for the Celtics, we’re talking about 14 years ago, I shared a cubicle with one of our analytics/tech guys and he would share with me their dashboards for college prospects. At the time Daryl Morey (current Rockets GM and the first “analytics GM” in the NBA) was our EVP of Technology, and he led the team to develop a platform for predicting how college players would do using all these formulas, statistical techniques, etc. They created a software for inputting player data, including class, position, # of college games played, height, all of the players stats, and probably a ton more stuff and it would determine for them how successful the player would be based on historical data on similar players. It was all pretty fascinating.

Positionless basketball is not trash. Most successful teams in basketball right now subscribe to this theory. The best teams in the NBA (Houston, GS, Boston, Toronto, etc.) and most in college (Villanova last year, Michigan this year) are using multi-skilled players that can play multiple spots on the court and defend multiple spots on the court. Most teams have 1 pg, 1 big who is athletic and skilled, and then everyone else is a wing that can handle, shoot and defense multiple spots. That's where the game is going. I do agree that Smith should fit perfectly into that theory, he would be a perfect positionless basketball player, but unless he improves massively in terms of skill, literally nothing about his game allows him to effectively play on the perimeter offensively right now. Tell me what he does offensively that's effective on the perimeter? He's a slasher that can't catch the ball or finish in traffic. Great! I'm not sure why you're bringing up Beilein or Knight? Neither one of them is walking through that door. Archie Miller is IU's coach and we're discussing how to make this roster more effective offensively. Yes, I think putting our most skilled offensive players (which I agree isn't many) on the floor together is the way to get this offense going. Rob, Durham, Langford, and Morgan are the most skilled, and at least threats to shoot. Put them on the floor together, with Morgan in the spot in the offense that Smith is usually in (which is a huge upgrade at that spot and would force the defense to respect it), and then round it out with Moore who has at least shown the ability to get an offensive rebound and finish.

A 3 is a wing/perimeter player, so yes if you want to be effective it helps a great deal to be able to handle the ball and shoot the ball. It's the entire positionless basketball theory of having skilled guys at every position that can shoot, handle and distribute. Right now Justin Smith is poor at all of those things. Teams literally do not defend him whatsoever when he's on the perimeter and it's part of what is killing the offense. He currently is not a 3, or at least not a good or effective one. Again, the change I'm proposing, while slight, is a change offensively. It's putting Morgan at the 4 instead of the 5, it gets more skill on the court together (right now Smith is our most unskilled offensive player), while not sacrificing defense. It's also utilizing Green on the wing, instead of the point, when he comes back. He's mistake prone, frustrating and takes bad shots for sure, but let him play a role where he can focus on hitting shots and not thinking about distributing. I'm not sure what you mean with McRoberts? I'm not advocating for him to play more, I'm advocating to put our skilled guys (Phinisee, Langford, Durham, Green off the ball, and Morgan) in the game together so they can be more effective. It also doesn't hurt the defense to have our best defenders, Phinisee, Green/Durham and Langford, in more together, while you also keep Morgan from defending the big 5's because he's at the 4 spot. Again, it's a very slight change, but getting Morgan at the 4 could have an impact, but I don't see how it works effectively with Smith clogging things up on the perimeter.

What do you mean 'Smith has to play at some point'? Smith has played tons of minutes and he's shown he can't shoot, handle or finish. Defenses literally do not guard him at all, they completely sag off him and it clogs up the entire lane. I'd also disagree that his natural position is the 3. What has he shown that leads you to believe he's capable of playing the 3? Again, he can't handle, shoot or finish. Yes, we have played with guards, but we've rarely, if ever, done it with Morgan at the 4. That would be the big change in what I'm suggesting. That could (it might not work, but it's worth a try) completely change the dynamic. We've always done it with Smith at the 4 and we've pretty much covered why his offensive limitations hurt that. Put Morgan at the 4 with 3 guards and now you have threats at 4 of the 5 positions offensively.

I disagree. Of course the shooting has been horrendous, but I think the answer is getting more skilled, fast guys on the court. Smith simply cannot play the 3. He hasn't shown any ability to do anything on the perimeter, and he hasn't shown an ability to finish at the rim or handle the ball. If you go with a smaller, quicker lineup you can get faster and more skilled, yet with Morgan at the 4 and someone like Moore we're not giving up size on the inside. While we have struggled to shoot, we can put a better shooting lineup out there in Phinisee (39.6% from 3), Durham (38.9%)/Green (35.6%), Langford (21.1% - not good), Morgan (38.3%) and Moore (not really a shooter). That lineup is more skilled and has three guys shooting good from 3 and another (Langford) that while he's struggling from 3 has to be respected as an explosive offensive player.

Just my opinion, but I don't think going big is the answer, IU shouldn't be slowing things down they should be speeding things up. What I would like too see is a more skilled, explosive lineup. I'd go something like Phinisee, Green (I know, I get it, you could also put Durham here), Langford, Morgan, Moore. I think you want Morgan (better shooter, better ball handler, more skilled) in that Smith role. With this lineup you have guys that can create, and to varying degrees shoot, at 4 of the 5 spots, and Moore has shown an ability to hit the offensive glass. I think this lineup is faster and has the ability to be more explosive.

I don’t how Smith could play on the wing/3. He hasn’t show any ability to handle the ball, shoot the ball or even remotely take care of the ball. Putting him on the perimeter even more and in even more situations to handle the ball doesn’t sound like a good idea.

One of my biggest worries for this game is that it's our first neutral site game. We already struggle to shoot from distance as a team, and sometimes these NBA arenas take some adjusting to. I know we scrimmaged Loyola in Banker's Life, but it's not the same as a game. I could see IU coming out early missing shots and getting down. Hopefully we attack the rim early, get some easy buckets and get our shooters to the foul line (yes, I know we struggle there too) to get some shots going through the nets for confidence.