BGleas

I'm not into naming names on topics like this, but since it's in the vein of hoping he stays, I'll say I really hope Justin Smith finishes the year strong and stays. I think Archie should be playing him more as is, and I hope it happens really soon. But as I look ahead, and Smith hasn't really shown wing skills yet but I think he will develop them, we would have quite an athletic, long and skilled wing trio with Smith, Anderson and Hunter. They'll need to work hard and develop, but those three, especially if you then are able to add Langford, remind of the OSU teams when Matta had things rolling. He always had a roster full of interchangable, skilled, athletic guys with length on the wings. A bunch of guys 6'6'-6'8" that could defend 1-4, finish at the rim and knock down shots.

I didn't post in this thread, but did post in similar threads in other places. I was never high on this team. I'd be lying if I said I thought we would lose to ISU and FW, but I also never thought this team would be very good. I was hopeful Archie could get them competing by the end of the year (still can happen) and see improvement, but never thought we'd be that good. IMO, as I felt coming into the season, the talent just wasn't there as a collective group. There are clearly some talented kids, but the pieces simply don't fit. I felt our guard play was too erratic, and that we had no shooters capable of consistently knocking down shots. There is/was zero length on the perimeter or wing, and our interior lacked depth. There are no athletes on this team, and nobody that can just flat get buckets when you need it. It's hard to win with no length on the perimeter or wing, nobody that can consistently hit 3's and/or nobody that can get to the rim. Again, clearly we have talent. Morgan is an emerging player, RoJo is a 1,000 point scorer, etc., etc., but the pieces fit horribly in terms of the guards and wings especially. In terms of big, again Morgan has been really good, but matched with Davis we have two bigs that need to operate on the block and neither can shoot, and neither are great athletes, and then match that with a backcourt that struggles to shoot and lacks athletes, and it's a bad mix. I'm not trying to act like we should just fold up for the season and there's nothing Archie can do, but I never thought the talent was there too be all that good. Again though, I also never thought we'd love to ISU and FW, especially not by 20 at home. There is a clear disconnect with the players and staff right now, and Archie needs to fix it ASAP or things could go bad. He can't lose momentum to the point where the local recruits (Langford, Brooks, TJD) don't want to come here. A new coach should bring enthusiasm and optimism. I'm also a bit puzzled as to why he hasn't developed Smith more in game action. I think he could really be helping this team with his length and athleticism. Now, I have seen coaching moves from Archie that have me very encouraged. I'm not worried about the X's and O's with him. IU has carved up some zones this year. When was the last time we saw that? There have been adjustments to the lineup (sitting Davis for much of the ND game, starting McRoberts the second half against Youngstown) and strategy (doubling Bagley against Duke & Colson against ND, and other things) that have impacted games. The defense, while still not great, is clearly better. We've run some flex action and other sets that we never ran under Crean in the halfcourt. I can still see the vision, and I think it will be benefited greatly by having a real point guard (Phinisee) and I think Archie's system will look a lot better with size and length (Anderson, Hunter, Smith) on the perimeter and wings. But unfortunately we may have to wait for those guys to develop. The momentum being slowed stinks though, because Romeo could greatly impact the timeline.

I don't agree with that. His defense improved tremendously, he was a better leader, shot 48% from 3 and averaged a career high in rebounds. His scoring went down, but that coincides with the continued emergence of Zeller and the emergence of VO. I'm not an advanced metrics guy, but looking at the stats he had the highest win share of his career and highest PER.

He should certainly be rebounding better, but rebounding is more about positioning and fast-twitch leaping than pure size. It's why a guy like Dennis Rodman is one of the greatest rebounders ever. He wasn't big or even all that tall, but he played great positioning and he could jump high and then leap again quickly. De'Ron, while big, is slow, doesn't jump high and doesn't jump quickly. Once he's down he has to re-gather to jump again. He's just so limited athletically.

Just saw this posted on Facebook. Maybe Archie needs to do something like this with Morgan. Not that Morgan isn't playing hard, but he's the one guy this team can lean on and ride, but it seems like the team could use more excitement/leadership from him.

It makes sense, but I think maybe it’s just semantics over the word “talented”. Do Morgan and Davis have more raw talent? Probably. Morgan is more athletic, and Davis has more size, but Happ is by far the best basketball player out of the three of them. Morgan and Davis can’t shooot either, and Happ is a better ball handler and passer than both. I think Happ and Morgan are comparable on the block, both are crafty and good finishers, but Happ has about 3 inches on him which helps. There is a reason Happ is an All-American and the other two aren’t. Bottom line, if we’re picking teams amongst the two rosters, I’m taking Happ #1 and thanking god I had the first pick. On Archie, like I said, I’m still onboard the train. There are certainly some things that are concerning, but I agree with the player you spoke too, not everyone is bought in, which is a shame. I think the team will look a lot different next year. Albeit young which will pose challenges, but the team will have size and length on the perimeter, there will be some shooters, a good ball handler in Phinisee. I think the added length will help the defense, better shooters and skilled athletes will make things look a lot different. It’s definitely a weird time for IU basketball. There see,s to be a huge lack of excitement, both from the players and the fans, and I don’t know what Archie can do about that, but he has to find a way to flip it. I hope the lack of momentum doesn’t impact the recruiting trail.

Absolutely, and I have a ton of respect for your opinion as well! I don't think we're that far off. I agree something isn't right. Archie is clearly not getting through to these guys. There's a lack of energy and urgency overall, though that was there with the same guys under Crean, but Archie was selling that he was going to fix that. The offense is completely stagnant and Morgan is the only player with any confidence offensively, and even with him his confidence only goes to about 5ft. I'm still fully aboard the Archie train though, I like what he says, he's clearly a "basketball guy", etc. I think he'll be fine, but yes the optics don't look great right now. I'm not sure what to make of him on the offensive end, though in his defense early in the season we saw IU carve up some zone defenses better than they have in years. I've also seen him design defenses to stop guys (though it didn't work against Happ) and make adjustments. I'm not worried about his X's and O's for the most part. As far as the talent, I stand by that. IU absolutely has more talent than Wisconsin did last night top to bottom. But my point was that only 5 guys play at a time, and last night Wisconsin had 2 of the 3 best players, and with Happ they had the best player on the floor by a pretty wide margin.

He's also a leader. The announcers were talking about how as a freshmen he's the vocal leader of the team. They said he realized early on that Happ isn't a talker, so he stepped up to be the guy. You could tell on the court too, he's got that confident moxy that nobody on IU ever seems to have.

1-12? Absolutely. But you can only play 5, and Wisconsin had 2 of the 3 (Happ, Morgan, Davison) best players on the floor, and Morgan only played half the game because of foul trouble. So essentially for half the game they had the two best players on the court. Probably some debate on Davison, but having seen him play twice (2nd time being last night) I would take him over any of our guards.

I hate getting caught up in the recruiting rankings talk, but Newkirk was more like a #130ish ranking, not top 100. Last season CuJo was terrible except for the KU game, and Davis was decent in very limited minutes, though many of his struggles (fouling, lack of athleticism) were still there, not sure we can really say he was better. But it's about more than rankings. It's just a bad roster composition. Again, we're not overly athletic. We don't have any lights out shooters. No length on the wing, and no depth on the interior. Nobody specializes in anything. The back-court is a bunch of combo guards that aren't really good at any one particular thing, etc. The rankings are what they were for these guys, but that doesn't mean the roster composition is any good.

I like what I see from Archie, and I just think this roster is horribly constructed which is why IU is struggling. I think Archie has a real chance to be the long-term solution at IU, if everyone has patience. He's a "basketball guy", a "coaches, coach". He grew up around the game, has spent his entire life in the gym playing, coaching, etc. I think he'll eventually really connect well with recruits and high school/AAU coaches, because he speaks their language. I think he's really good on the X's and O's side with game-planning, adjustments, etc., and it just remains to be seen to what level he'll be able to recruit. If I have one criticism so far, it's that he didn't clean house a bit when first taking over. I don't know what the thought process was, maybe he felt it was the right thing to do in keeping everyone, maybe he felt he needed to fight the old "Creaning" perception from IU to really implement his inside/out strategy, maybe he didn't have a ton of high level recruit contacts from being at Dayton so felt he couldn't really get anyone for the '17 class on short notice. May it's all the above or non of the above. But, I'll hold firm with how I felt all summer, this roster isn't good. That's why this team stinks. I don't care what the rankings say, the roster just isn't there. It's an NIT team that lost it's 3 best players and didn't really add anyone. We have no length, no athleticism, no size on the perimeter whatsoever. No pure shooter. No pure scorer. No pure ballhandler/point guard. No leaders. No interior depth. Outside of Morgan, it's a bunch of role players who don't fit together. The thought that Davis was going to be better than Bryant was laughable. Yes Bryant had some issues last season, but he's a stud compared to Davis. You can win with a bunch of role players, but for that to work you need some specialists. You need a shooter, you need a rebounder, you need a defender, you need leader, etc. You don't need guys with every skill, but you some guys that specialize in a particular skill, and this team has none of that outside of Morgan. It's a bunch of guys limited athletically that are average to slightly above-average at some things, but nobody is really good at any one thing.

I think the narrative that Wisconsin was devoid of talent last night and that there was a big talent difference was way overblown by the announcing crew. I don't think there was all that much of a talent difference to be honest. Of course Wisconsin was short-handed, no doubt about that, and the announcers played off that narrative. But, basketball is a 5-on-5 game where among the team sports one player can probably make the biggest difference. 1-10 was IU more talented? Sure. But, Ethan Happ is by far the most talented player on either roster. I think if you lined the teams up, Wisconsin had 2 of the 3 best players on the floor (Happ, Morgan, Davison), and for us Morgan was taken out of the game with fouls. I would trade any 3 players from IU for Happ and Davison. With Morgan only playing 22 minutes, for almost half the game Wisconsin had the two best players on the floor. Of the 5 players on the court IU's 3-5 was better, absolutely, but the top-end talent usually wins out.

This. I have no idea how much he’ll play next year, but he does bring something this roster doesn’t have. He’s a long, athletic, bouncy fromtcourt player. He brings something nobody else currently on the roster does. That doesn’t mean he’ll be ready next year, but assuming he develops and has skill to go along with it, it’s good to have a guy with those attributes.

Completely forgot about him.

Unless some unanticipated additions happen in the Spring, either Forrester or Moore are going to have to be ready to play some minutes behind Davis next season. Though I think we’ll have more roster turnover than we all anticipate, which could make the above moot.

McRoberts has earned it and the team plays better with him on the floor, especially if he can hit open 3’s. Plus, it would get IU away from the 3-guard lineup and get more length and athleticism on the floor.

This is one area where I agree with Cal. Are home/home series with top teams fun to watch? Absolutely. But Cal is prepping his teams for the postseason, as that’s what matters at UK, and the NCAA Tournament is a neutral court tournament. It’s mostly played in cavernous arenas with lots of empty seats and sterile shooting backgrounds, and he’s preparing for those.

No, you need the Youngstown game to shake the rust off after 4 days off. Four days is plenty to prepare for Wisconsin.

Completely agree. Just looking at the difference of the games between Saturday and Monday it’s clear. Against ND defenders were hedging ball screens hard and recovering with purpose and attitude. Help side defenders were dropping into the paint to cover until bigs recovered and then sprinting out to shooters. Momday guys were standing on defense, giving half effort on hedges and recovering, etc., etc. We turned the ball over at will and as everyone has said, the turnovers were just boneheaded turnovers. Thats a focus issue largely on the players.

This is what I'm excited about as well, and something that I think is going to really help Archie transform the program. As a Celtics fan, I'll equate it to the C's. When the Hayward and IT/Kyrie deals went down a lot of people thought the Celtics wouldn't be better because they lost the heart, soul, grit, etc. that IT, Bradley and Crowder brought. But what they weren't realizing, and something I was high on, was that by moving those three guys, who I liked, the Celtics went from a little engine that could team that lacked size, length and athleticism on the wing and perimeter, to a team with size, length and athleticism all over the court. Jaylen Brown and Tatum are young for sure, but they've transformed the way the Celtics play, along with Kyrie, on both ends. Have guys 6'7" and taller on the wings, and a pg that's 6'3"ish as opposed to 5'7", make the team so much more versatile and dynamic. There's so much more you can do. With this class, IU goes from a small, 3-guard lineup, to a team with size at the pg (if you include Duram) and size, length and athleticism on the wing. I'd expect our 3-pt defense to get much better with that group and our ability to penetrate and finish from the wing offensively (along with other things).

Absolutely! My post wasn't meant as a criticism of Archie, just a comment in general on whiffing on guys, etc. Given the late start, I think Archie did a pretty remarkable job with the '18 and it becomes almost unbelievable if he lands Langford. I think lost in the Garland/Langford hype is how amazing it really is that in less than 4 months on the job Archie targeted and landed RP, Anderson, Hunter and Foorrester.

I understand what you're saying, and it's not necessary to have a roster full of top guys to win, of course. You can also get good players even when you whiff on higher rated guys. But, the problem with "whiffing" on guys is that you're not landing your targets, and that shows a problem with the program, and also creates a scenario where you're more likely to end up with rosters that don't mesh well. I think we saw that with Crean the last few years. He clearly brought in some decently rated guys and some diamonds in the rough that exceeded expectations, but it's also clear that he quite often the last few years whiffed on his primary targets and had to go to options B, C, D, etc., which created a roster that didn't always fit together. What I'm saying is that I get not being overly concerned with the ranking of the players we're getting, but to me it is a problem if we're consistently missing the guys we target (regardless of their ranking).

One thing that has me a little hopeful for Saturday is that ND doesn't have a lot of size or shot-blockers. I'm holding out hope that RoJo can get to the rim and finish and also get to the line and sink some free throws to maybe get his shooting confidence back. I guess I'm hoping this is a matchup that could get RoJo going a bit, as he struggles against length. On the flip side, ND could destroy us from deep on the other end.

I agree. It would not shock me if a couple other players transfer out after the season. I'm not getting into the guessing game, but it just wouldn't surprise me. If it happens then the interesting piece will be how Archie fills the slots in terms of talent and class balance.

Completely agree. Under Crean and right now we're a 3-guard team, not a postionless basketball team. It was always partly what killed IU under Crean. We rarely had size/length/athleticism at the 2-4 spots, and especially the 2-3 spots. I think Archie is looking to recruit a bunch of 6'5" to 6'8" "wings" that are skilled and have length/athleticism which will greatly improve the 3-pt defense. It's much harder to knock down an open 3 when someone like OG is closing out on you as opposed to someone like Josh Newkirk or Robert Johnson. I'm not sure what years Archie was at OSU as an assistant, but I'd look for him to build teams similar to the OSU teams when Matta had it rolling. Those teams always had a big and a point guard, but then surrounded them by versatile, athletic, long wings in guys like Buford, Diebler, Lighty, LaQuinton Ross, Evan Turner, etc.