Old Friend

I don't think anyone on our team makes the consistent number of poor decisions he makes and has for 3 seasons. I'm generally not hard on freshmen because they're freshmen. Romeo was disappointing as hell this season for myriad reasons, but DeVonte hasn't fixed what's wrong in 3 seasons. Who else should I be equally hard on?

If everyone's bar for success were the same, this world would be very boring. I thought last night, for example, he had some really good moments and made some plays that helped the team. I also thought he made - and think he makes every game - several plays that hurt, too and I think that matters against better teams. So, if he is to be relied on next season, my initial point was he needs to limit "bad DeVonte." We've proven over 3 seasons what we are with him on the team, so his development is part of the necessary changes.

Mea culpa if that was your intent. You know what they say about email/text etc. You might consider something other than a straw man comment like "if ______. you'd be ______" if that's really what you're doing, but if that was your intent I apologize. That said, if we're talking about broken records, you and a handful of others have been on me about "style" for years. And since it's the same few guys over and over, all I can interpret by that is it's a personal thing because I haven't heard from mods or anyone else. So is it a personal thing? If so...as I said, it's a free chat board and there are more important things than some dude's style to worry about. That's my 2 cents.

Fair enough then. But....I would ask those who say things like "I'd trash the kid if he had a monster game and focus on the turnovers" to be fair with me too. Just last week I made a specific point to give props to the kid for a good game; so this can be a 2-way street, yes?

In bold above....as I said earlier, this might be right. Except it isn't. Last week...yeah...last week...I made it a point to specifically single him out when he had a good game. So this is a complete load of fabricated crap from you...and whoever "HoosierX" is. An incorrect assumption because you have a personal problem with me I don't care about even some. Come at me with fabricated BS to fit your agenda, I'll call you out for it. And I am. Sorry I'm not impressed with 4-13 from the floor and 3 turnovers (yeah, yeah...I know. He was credited for 2, so let's say 4-12 and 3 TO's with several bad shots. You're asking me - after watching a 17-15 season with turnovers as a big problem - to just excuse that because you don't want to read it anymore? Then don't read my posts. Ignore them, You have that option, too. You "like" every post that disagrees with me, so that may be a broken record as well. Why don't you let me choose the hill I want to die on and stop worrying about it? This is a free chat board. You don't have to keep reading....but for some reason..you do. And I'm still not convinced you're not the same "Josh" who stalked me for years and complained about similar things.

In bold Because we were left with just two guards if he didn't. You and I see two different players, which is okay; but the narrative isn't incorrect unless you are willing to gloss over the bad shots and careless plays. The problem is not those plays specifically, so arguing specific plays is pointless. The problem is the consistency of those plays. Over 3 seasons. But...both alley oop passes were high risk; and weren't necessary. (And neither pass was caught. Both resulted in baskets by players trailing the play.) Why make that pass? He tries to hit the home run way too frequently and against good teams, it hurts more than it helps. You're a smart guy. Did you really watch him this season and disagree that he gives away at least 5-6 possessions in every game? He lost his job to Phinissee for a reason. He played just 11 minutes (while healthy) in a recent game for a reason; and I will submit he played because we truly had nobody else. No player is all good or all bad. And no. I don't care for his style of play and I'm not wrong any more than you are.

If you've watched how he plays for 3 seasons, you do know. (Maybe you think it's taboo to say it...I don't) If you've ever seen playground basketball in New York, you do know. If you have played competitively against younger brothers of good players, you do know. Hero plays and careless passes speak. As do bad shots. I never mentioned his motivation for anything. You can discuss without putting words in my mouth. Nor did I say he wasn't in some aspects a team player. You've either seen him for 3 years or you haven't.

Mental. 100% mental. Selfish sometimes and thinks he's better than he is. Comes from growing up on the playground and playing against his brother. That brand of basketball and college/Big Ten basketball are different things and he is a playground player at heart. I get it....but at some point you have to learn...don't you?

I know for a fact Pitino called IU twice (once following Davis, once following Sampson/Dakich) proactively and wanted the job. Both times he was told (and Shoulders was involved) Indiana University did not want a coach who might be bigger than the University. I think (based on some decent intel) the Izzo thing is false. Alford wanted the job; and I know Calipari inquired about it. Have no intel on Stevens' contract at Butler, but Crean did just enough to save his job. Twice. Indiana has still not recovered from hiring Mike Davis.

Yes. That was then, Which is why I made the point. IU fans are smart. We / they can see what's happening; and when you can see what a coach is trying to do and see who he's recruiting, it's fun to watch development. Knight's national championships all came with very experienced teams, and by his standards there were some years where fans just had to be patient and let the team build. (1985, 1988, 1990 as most recent examples in his tenure here) I won't argue with you, but given that culture which we had for 29 seasons, I'm not sure why you think fans would have been impatient.

All I was saying above is he has to lose "bad DeVonte." When he plays well and lets things come to him, he is really good. The problem with him is we get the good and the bad within the same game. He made some shots last night for example. Got into the paint. Rebounded okay and made some really solid passes. He also threw 2 careless alley-oop passes, both of which would have been turnovers had his team mates not cleaned him up; was credited with 2 turnovers which should have been 3 because the last strip/steal was counted as a blocked shot; he took too many shots and several "bad shots," and he just needs to be more sound with the ball in his hands. Get rid of the consistent carelessness and he's fine.

Hhhmmm....this might be true...except just last week, he had a pretty good game and I specifically referenced it. And his numbers weren't anywhere close to these. So I have 2 conclusions : 1) You come here to fight. To stir the pot. To troll. Because this adds nothing and it's just a stupid, brainless post designed to troll. Or.. 2) You're okay with turnovers and bad shots as "part of the game." Which is sad. So which is it? In a league where there are close games every night, he gives away 5-6 possessions every game. If you watch games...you know that as well as I do and if you don't acknowledge it, you're as guilty of bias as you say I am. Last night...against a bad team, he gave away at least 6 possessions. Do the good things he does erase those? What do you think a good coach would tell him? Why do you think he lost his starting job to a smaller, weaker freshman? Does that matter against good teams? He's led the team in turnovers/minutes played the last 2 seasons and his freshman year had a negative A;TO ratio; all while shooting under 40% for his career; due in large part to bad or selfish shots. That's just a simple truth. So yeah...because it's a consistent problem, it gets mentioned. Especially when he may be counted on to lead next season. You think fans will tolerate another 18-15 season and watch his act give possessions away every night? Maybe you and I watch games differently. Which is fine.

If you use stats he's one player. If you watch him, he's another. His decision making; his propensity for foolish, careless plays, and his incredibly mind numbing shot selection don't show up on the stat sheet. (Again, when people reference IU having success and then taking some shot that's seemingly out of nowhere and killing momentum? That's generally Green. The poor choices and bad timing that is harmful to his team won't show in a stat sheet) I'll grant he has been a better and more positive influence lately; but even last night there were at least 6 plays I can remember that were just possession giveaways and another couple of hero plays that would have been turnovers had team mates not bailed him out. He gets rid of those plays, he's a really good college player. His A:TO ratio is 3:2.2. Phinisee's is 2.8:1.2. So..while you're right that Green is getting more assists (and that's in some part due to kids making shots), that's only part of the story.

Stemming the tide, maybe. Seen this movie before. I saw someone say they had heard he was the most complete offensive player in Marion County and could see that legend begin to build.

He absolutely pulled some in (probably a poor choice of words on my part), but he didn't focus on it, nor did he bring in one or two and allow those kids to have different agendas than everyone else. Nor was his mentality "win now." "Stars" weren't his focus. Kids who could succeed within his system were. Brian Evans, for example was on nobody's "star" radar in high school and became the Big Ten POY. Cheaney broke his leg his senior year and was not highly touted in high school, yet became the Big Ten's all time leading scorer. AJ Guyton was another not highly touted kid. Pat Graham was a relative unknown until he was a senior but had an IU offer as a junior. Just examples...Grunwald, Woodson, Abernathy, and any number of successful role players like Eyl, Leary, Meier, Sloan, Radford, etc. There are a lot of kids who had successful careers under Knight who weren't what we would call "stars" today, but there were also kids who WERE and fit what he wanted. Does that make sense? What he (Knight) didn't do was bring in many kids who were 1 or 2 and done. Regardless of how kids were rated in high school; Knight recruited (especially when HE was the one recruiting). And some of the "stars" he DID bring in failed because they were hyped and not used to his discipline. Recker, Collier, Funderburke, etc. Yes...for sure he brought in highly talented kids; but he didn't prioritize instant success or "win now." That wasn't his focus and my point was Indiana fans had been conditioned to compete in the Big Ten every year and compete nationally about every 3-5 years unless Knight was able to stack recruiting classes on top of each other. His best teams had seniors. His best teams were built over time. That was - at the time - what Indiana fans were used to and I believe then and now would embrace that as long as they were seeing the build. I truly believe Beilein at that time would have been the perfect hire; and again, depending on who you believe, he was on an airplane with a contract in his hand when Herbert vetoed it and insisted Indiana hire a minority to replace Davis. Oh, and Herbert thought Kelvin Sampson was black. Which I still think is hysterical. The velvet fog......

I wasn't aiming any comment at you. More smiling at the mentality that seems to say year after year that kids are magically ready to be Big Ten players simply because they become available. If they can breathe, they're a target. "Best offensive player in Marion County" and comments like that make me smile... Cathedral is in Marion County, and I can promise you Arman Franklin is worlds better offensively than LaRavia. Ahmoni Jones from Pike put up 32 and 10 head to head AGAINST LaRavia this season and just killed him. I'm just saying I can see the legend brewing because he's available. Remember Mike "Kong" White who was going to come here and dominate the paint in the Big Ten? That started with a highlight video.

There are a bunch of kids who have "gotten it done" in that conference. I played in that conference. I still live within the boundaries of that conference. There are also a lot of kids in that conference who will play intramural basketball as their next step. I think you're devaluing Brown's skills (and again, not saying either is right or wrong); but I'm more laughing at the "next shiny thing" mentality. Same people who fawned over Clifton Moore's potential and Jake Forrester's athleticism probably think LaRavia is going to come in and contribute as a freshman.

Okay, you can do better than look at a stat sheet, right? He had 3 turnovers. He was credited with 2, but the play near the end...the strip/steal was counted as a blocked shot. He also threw 2 careless alley-oop passes that would have been turnovers had his team mates not cleaned up after him; and you have to have watched him enough this season to notice the horrible shot selection. Those shots people are discussing that stopped momentum and were essentially "my turn" shots? At least 3 of them were Green's. If you look at a stat sheet you see 6 assists (against one of the worst defenses in the country) and 2 TO's. If you actually watched the game and have watched the season.........

Help me. Kid decommits from SIU-Edwardsville and all of a sudden he's capable of being a contributor at Indiana, but Luke Brown, who averages 35 points a game, can shoot the lights out, and has big time D1 interest isn't someone we should go after because he's got some limitations as a sophomore. I'm not saying either are right or wrong, but I do laugh at the logic and reactions.

Green was 4-13 from the floor and took several bad shots again. He also had 3 more turnovers. He's gotta' lose "Bad DeVonte" for him to be a good combo with anybody. The good in him can light up a gym. The bad can lose his team games.

Disagree. Knight didn't bring in many "stars" either. He won with a system. He won with upper classmen. He won with defense and offensive efficiency. He won with kids who understand how to play basketball. He won with those kids' toughness and leadership. Knight's system is Indiana's DNA. Not instant winning and stars. He didn't care one bit how many stars were by a kid's name. Belien, from a basketball perspective, is as close to Knight as there is in college basketball. What makes you say Indiana wouldn't have been patient enough? As long as Indiana fans can see what a coach is trying to do and making progress; they'd have been plenty patient. Especially when we had the opportunity to hire him....which - depending on what you believe - was when we fired Mike Davis. I think Belein would have absolutely been embraced; especially following Davis and TELLING fans we're going to build this the right way. I think that's exactly what people wanted to hear at that time, and when we went for "stars," it ruined the culture of this program and has not yet recovered.

Why would the board of trustees at any university have multiple people who were basketball players? Why is that relevant to a BoT?

I'll give you the first 2. There was no reason....none...to be worse in year 3 than we were in year 2. People that say Crean needed the 3 years would say he needed 8 if that were the narrative. Crean is the guy who made excuses about "the first 3 years," and the blind loyalists drank the Kool Aid. His BT record was worse year 3 than it was year 2; and he was already making excuses. Tom Crean needs the best talent to win a game. It is and was very rare for him to win when his talent wasn't quite matched up and he got out-coached all the time.

This is pretty much spot on; so I won't insult you by adding anything of substance. However, to add to Boot's question, not only is all of this true (and there's more to it, especially the part about the administration's conscious decisions; however this is a pretty spot on representation of the problem), is he does it with a smug arrogance I find completely offensive. He seems to think he's the smartest and most entitled man in every room into which he walks. Let's just say if you met the guy, it wouldn't take long to understand why he is viewed largely as an unlikable guy; and I love Dakich for hammering him every chance he gets. You all can hate on Dakich all you want; however as it relates to the insides of IU, he's generally right.

Dakich kills the guy every chance he gets. He's also right!