Hillsdale87

What were the names Snow was referring to? I don't remember seeing this Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We can agree to disagree. This is pointless. Neither of us are going to change the other's mind Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm just telling you that the data doesn't back up your argument, and the eye test is very misleading. What other stats would you like to point to? I basically just listed every offensive stat while conceding that turnovers are a little higher than I would like. He's above average in basically everything except turnovers, and he wasn't as much of a disaster there as you claim (he's averaged an even 2/game over the last 2 years. Youay see a bunch more, but I'll go with the official scorer). There's very little evidence to back up your claim that Green was especially detrimental compared to others. If he's only taking 7 shots a game, and 3 are going in, it's statistically impossible for him to take a bunch of bad shots every game. You keep saying 5-6 possessions a game, and that's not even close to true. Rob is more careful with the ball. Devonte makes more happen. Both are and will be important for the team as they bring different skill sets on offense and play good defense. The starting spot is pretty meaningless as they played pretty much equal minutes. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would prefer we had the talent where they both come off the bench too, but that was unfortunately not the case this year. I think Green should continue to come off the bench next year even though he's one of our better guards because I think he gets into the game better after there is already a bit of a flow. Hopefully Smith makes some strides and improves his outside shot, but it wouldn't shock me if Race passes him with a healthy off-season. That concussion killed any chance of taking a step forward during the season Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You should be equally hard on basically everybody except Morgan. Green was the 3rd leading scorer and led the team in assists and steals per game. For all your complaints about his bad shots, he led the guards in effective field goal percentage. Yes he had too many turnovers, but he was still one of our best players Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm not saying your bar is too high in general. I just don't think you evaluate Devonte by the same standards that you evaluate everybody else on the team. You're harder on him than anybody else. Yes, you applauded his play at the end of the season, but it's impossible to criticize those games. His efficiency was incredible. Yes, I would love good Devonte without bad Devonte. That would make him the best player on the team. But even if he just gets marginally better over the off-season he's still a valuable player because he can flash on offense, plays good defense and is a good rebounder for a guard Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think that's fair, but I think your bar for Devonte to have a good game is higher than for other players on the team. I could be wrong, but that's the way it comes off.

I think he's undisciplined, but that is not the same as selfish. And you're just wrong about his volume of bad shots. He takes 7 shots per game and makes 3. Unless all of his misses are bad shots, then he's not taking very many bad shots. People come at you with data, and you continue to say that your eyes tell you otherwise. Your eyes are more likely to involve your biases than data. It's fine if you don't like his style of play. I prefer guys with more upside (Green) to the steady guys who are consistent (Rob), even though I see value in both and understand why people prefer the reverse. I think Rob will eventually become a better player than Green though because I think he will combine consistency with greater upside; he's just not quite there yet, which is fine for a freshman. However, you keep talking about how Green throws away possessions with bad shots, and the evidence shows that he does not, at least not disproportionately to other guys. He averages 7.4 shots a game. Rob averages 6.7. They play basically the same number of minutes. And Green is a more efficient scorer. If you look at efficiency and points score, this would tell you that Green's shots are more productive than Rob's, and so Rob is actually the one more likely to be taking shots that hurt the offense. An open shot that you don't shoot well is still not a good shot. Green should shoot more than Rob because he's a better shooter. Green gets criticized for taking step back 3s that aren't in the flow of the offense, but the reality is that that's a higher percentage shot than Rob, Juwan, or Romeo taking 3s in the flow of the offense. When I defend Green, I often feel like I end up coming off as bashing Rob, which I don't mean to do. I really like Rob and am excited about his potential. I think he was a valuable player this year too, even though he had ups and downs that you would expect from a young PG in a good conference. But I just think that a lot of the love for who Rob is as a player right now gets overblown because he plays the "right" way, and Devonte has a lot of flair to his game. Again, I understand stylistic preferences, but at the end of the day, it's important to look at the data as they help weed out our biases.

You make a lot of assumptions about Devonte's motivations. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, but I don't think it's wise or fair to attribute negative attributes to a guy like that. He plays hard consistently and works on defense. Those are attributes of a team player. I'm not saying he's not selfish. I don't know. But it seems like we're making a lot of assumptions (and Danny Green is a completely different player)

I agree that his passes are often ill advised. He'd throw less of them if he wasn't the primary ball handler though, just because he would have the ball less. Also, for as much as we talk about his passing mistakes, he averages 2 TOs per game. That's not great, but it's also not killing us. It feels magnified because many on the board emphasizes each error he makes. I agree that stats don't always tell the story when looking at a box score, but they generally do over the course of a season as a 30 game season smooths out a lot of variance. He definitely takes some bad shots, but he takes a lot less than Romeo or Justin Smith. That's not to excuse him, but just showing that he's not alone in this. He also only takes 0.5 more shots per game (with greater efficiency) than Rob, who everybody acknowledges is a good decision maker. When the offense bogs down, as it often did, you're going to see a lot more bad shots as guys start pressing. I don't think it's a coincidence that he took a lot fewer bad shots as the rest of the offense improved towards the close of the year. Romeo is obviously a better all around player, but he's a terrible shooter and took a lot more momentum stopping shots than Green. Plus Green is actually a good shooter. I know people on here get upset when he shoots a quick 3, but an open 3 from a 40+% 3 point shooter is a good shot anywhere in the shot clock. You're never going to get rid of bad Devonte. If you get rid of bad Devonte, you're also going to lose a lot of good Devonte. Part of his value comes in being able to finish shots and passes that nobody else on the team is capable of. That is going to come with mistakes, but he needs to make enough positive plays to offset the negative. That's not to say he can't cut down on the mistakes - he needs to cut out the brain farts, and he can eliminate some of the foolish alley oops - but he's always going to get turnovers trying to thread the needle on a few passes.

I don't think he should be limited to just shooting, but I agree he's not best served running the offense in a PG role. He's our shiftiest ball handler and our best passer. He gets guys easy shots more than anybody on the team. He's just not always a great decision maker, and so I'd much prefer Rob to be the primary ball handler. But using him like Nick Zeisloft is a wasted his skill Green needs to improve his mid range. He's pretty good at getting in the lane, but he's not a great finisher at the rim. If he can pull up in between he can be dangerous. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Effort is an issue, but talent obviously is too. These guys just aren't very good. Green is again the only guy making plays Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Both Rob and Durham need to become 40% 3 point shooters. I think Green actually works best off the bench in a 6th man role. I see him as a poor man's Jamal Crawford. He's probably the most skilled player on the team, definitely the most electric, but because of other shortcomings he's definitely not consistently the best. But he can be on a few nights as he was to close the season and at points last year. He's at his best when he's the primary scoring option, but he's not good enough to be the primary scoring option for the first unit. He's pretty valuable if he can carry the second unit and fill in with the starters as well. Coming off the bench also I think can help him find his role for the game, and he played more under control at the end of the season. If the offense is playing well, like at Illinois, he can play more in the flow of the offense. If the offense is stalling, like at OSU, he can up his aggressiveness. The key next year will be understanding his role and sticking to it. I think early he was pressing because he had lost his spot to Rob. By the end of the year hopefully he could see that he could still have a prominent role even without starting Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If Anthony Edwards had committed to Kentucky instead of Georgia then Brooks would probably have gone to IU too. Crean's recruiting continues to haunt us Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well with only 3 scholarships to fill we were never going to have a top class because those rankings factor quantity and quality. We have 2 good players coming in and will likely get another. Sucks to lose out on Brooks, but losing to the best recruiter in college basketball does not say anything about Archie's recruiting momentum Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree that they had less talent this year. They also had more experience. Both matter. That's not excusing the way the season went for IU because it should have been better, but I don't think the roster discrepancy was that stark when you factor in that OSU plays a lot of seniors. Experience can overcome talent a lot of times. They may have only had 8 scholarship players, but the ones they had were really good. Most teams only play 8 guys anyway. And Dakich ended up being a lot better than people expected. Holtmann certainly deserves plenty of credit for their great season last year, but he had a lot of good, experienced pieces to play with Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In year 2, their programs are essentially in the same place. They're both bubble teams. Let's see how they do from here. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe. I think Holtmann is really good. I'm happy with some of what I see from Archie. It's just that their tasks have been different. Holtmann has done well with Matta's players. His players were more developed and he could focus on implementing his system. He also has studs coming in next year, so I expect OSU to continue to be good. Archie has had to focus on both player development and teaching a completely new system. It's more complicated, and results have not been great yet, but I think we need to let his first recruiting class at least develop a little bit before declaring a winner. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Last year's OSU team had 3 upperclassman starters who had been top 100 recruits, plus Kaleb Wesson, who was a top 80 freshman. Bates-Diop ended up as Big 10 player of the year. That's a very good roster. The team chemistry had been a disaster the year before, and they lost 5 transfers, so it looked worse than it was. They were low on depth, but the guys they had were good. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Comparing Holtmann's and Archie's first 2 years is not really fair. Yes, Archie did not do a great job, and the team should have been better, but Holtmann took over a team that was full of solid upperclassmen. Indiana plays 1 senior, 2 juniors (who both missed a lot of time this year), and the rest sophomores and freshmen. They took over teams that had performed poorly the year before, but the talent and experience were very different.

I've never really understood the personal criticism directed at players even on message boards. The personal stuff that was said about Green and Smith during the losing streak IMO was over the line in terms of how we should react to a game. Sure, criticize a guy's performance, but the character attacks make me uncomfortable. These guys are kids that none of us know personally. Who knows what they're dealing with. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who was that?

Romeo was pretty frustrating to watch for most of the year, but that's unfortunate to hear. Especially considering we're trying to get another guy with legit NBA dreams right now. He had a good, not great season, and he wasn't the savior we were all hoping for, but those expectations were too high. He didn't have the season he was hoping for, and he won't be remembered as an IU legend in the way Yogi and Zeller will be, but there's no reason to get on him as fans

Between Knight's and Sampson's firing, IU has dealt with more turmoil than most programs. Sampson probably would have gotten IU back to being a consistently elite program if not for the ethics issues. Then Crean essentially took over an expansion team and couldn't build a consistent winner. I think we'll get there, but there's been a combination of bad luck and a few bad decisions that have combined to create a rough 20 years

I don't think we're dead. Chances are obviously low, but other teams on the bubble losing could give us a chance. Stewart Mandel just said that he thinks the committee will love the quad 1 wins and that he thinks we've got a shot.