HoosierHoopster

A little NBA lineup example, Clippers -- Largest comeback W since 2009, down 66-31 with about a min in 1st half. Down 66-36 at halftime, Clippers coach Ty Lue opened the third quarter with several of his starters on the bench. Lue didn't play starters Jackson, Nicolas Batum and Ivica Zubac in the second half, opting to go with guys such as Amir Coffey (29 points), Kennard (25 points) and Terance Mann (16 points). And that worked. They're erased a deficit of 24 or more points 3 times this season. The lineup is not etched in stone, the coach inserts players, as needed, when a lineup isn't clicking.

We're what, -47 in the past 7 or so games early 1st and 2nd halves? I don't have that stat but it's something like that. I don't understand not seeing that we repeatedly start slow, usually both halves, and get down, because we have not one but two guys who are just not strong defenders, who are out there to shoot 3's, but still are not shooting them -- we're again shooting the 3 by numbers towards the bottom of the B1G. Having 3-point shooters together on the floor doesn't help when they're not shooting. Then also not seeing that both Galloway and Geronimo are among our top players in conference both defensively and offensively, by the numbers (see the stats in the GG thread, they're pretty clear). And Galloway assists by the numbers, per minute, right there with X and Phin. When they come in we tend to get back into the game, from the hole that the same starting group repeatedly creates. There's really no good reason not to insert one of them into the starting group, imo.

Shawshank. It may be appropriate that you've quoted a get out of jail hope letter vbg -- we've been locked up a long time

IU 72 PSU 65

Sooner the better. It's time

Send the sims to Woodson -- :)

Wholeheartedly agree, and it goes directly to starting -- both halves -- with the same group including Parker and Kopp.

This is where the argument really is, there are fair points on both sides and imo it's why both Parker and Kopp continue to start -- creating space by, at least, the threat of their outside shooting. However, we are still, today, shooting by volume from deep at the freaking bottom of the B1G. That cuts directly against the idea that their presence keeps defenses honest -- defenses come into our games having IU well scouted, and that includes that we almost invariably try to run our O through TJD up front and take a limited number of 3's. I'm one who thinks we lose the game to PU but for TJD being on the bench -- it was guard play, Rob along with X, together with Galloway, Geronimo, Durr and Race, that overcame our now typical slow start and PU's having its way offensively because of mediocre D, that got us that W. And I love TJD, he's hands down our best player, but we can't keep running our O through him and having a porous backcourt and win, I think there's now enough Conference games behind us to see that. Imo, Kopp and Parker -- together -- are clearly not strong defensively, and they're not shooting near enough to overcome that. If we were raining 3's or at least shooting by numbers in the middle of the conference then I think that could work a lot better, but we're not. And as the above numbers reflect, both Geronimo and Galloway are up there defensively, and offensively, in the top group. I'd start Galloway as well because of how he is assisting on baskets, he doesn't have the handle or experience to run point, but he sees the floor and moves the ball timely to the right spots and players, and his D is miles better than Parker or Kopp.

Time to change up the primary lineup imo

The slow starts are almost routine now - need to consider a change up

That will have them pumped up for sure

The case for more Geronimo and Galloway (gamer talk, GG's), and maybe 1 starting (not expected but why not?) continues to grow. Following production stats so far in Conf play (8 games), they line up with the 'eye' test, and need for more of both Conference 100 possessions Defensive rating (DRtg) - Geronimo #1 (on season he's #2 behind TJD), Galloway #6 Total Boards - Geronimo #1 Blocks - Geronimo #2 Steals - Galloway #2 (Rob #1) Offensive rating (ORtg) - Geronimo #2, Trey #5 Points - Galloway #2, Geronimo #5 FT Attempts - Geronimo #3, Galloway #4 (G needs to continue work on FTs, in Conf at 62%, but improving - 49% on year), Trey at 69% 2PT% - Geronimo #1, Galloway #2 FG% - Geronimo #2, Galloway #3 Assists - Galloway #2 (X #1, Rob #3 -- Galloway's floor vision...) Conference Per 40 Min Total Boards - Geronimo #1 Blocks - Geronimo #2 Steals - Galloway #3 (but Leal at #2 on signif less min) Points - Galloway #2, Geronimo #5 FT Attempts - Geronimo #3, Galloway #4 2PT% - Geronimo #1, Galloway #2 FG% - Geronimo #2, Galloway #3 Assists: Galloway #2 Conference Totals vs. Minutes Per Game Total Boards: Geronimo #4 (MP #8) Blocks: Geronimo #2 (MP #8)) Steals: Galloway #5/6 (MP #7) Points: Galloway #6 (MP #7) Geronimo #8 (MP #8) (compare - Kopp #7, MP #5) FT Attempts - Galloway #4 (MP #7), Geronimo #5 (MP #8) Assists - Galloway #3 Starting isn't as important to me as finishing, but as a team we do tend to start both halves slow. How about Conference PER (player efficiency rating) Geronimo #2, Galloway #4 (TJD #1, Race #3) Same for WS/40 (win shares per 40 min) - Geronimo #2, Galloway #4 We need outside shooting to spread the floor, but both Geronimo and Galloway are at 33% from deep in Conf play (both 2 of 6 still small sample size - though Geronimo's 5/15 on season is also 33% - good for #5 on team) I'm on cup of coffee #1 but I think these are all accurate -- https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/indiana/2022.html

So far this season our guys have ended the winless road streak, and the streak of losses to PU. Next streak up

We're now 5th in Conference, and 5-3. The W over PU vaulted us over them, and Rutgers dropped with their L. MSU 6-1 Wisc 6-2 Ill 6-2 OSU 5-2 IU 5-3 -- Moving on up

We will get to the line against them, a real advantage - but need to convert, cant waste that advantage

Yes i know and that’s been pointed out already - but he destroyed UM bf in their house when we had to win it to claim the B1G, one of my favorite games of his

Vic was a monster

IU 71 MU 66

Rob’s quote during interview on this moment: ”I love Indiana University” I am 100 percent in Rob’s corner

Trey is a spark plug. Has some Moye in him, has some Sheehey toughness and moxie. Still needs to develop a solid jumper, but we’re definitely better with him than without

Included 7 PU fans

Oh I think our guys will be ready, wearing championship unis

That’s pretty wild, especially at this point early in regular season

Me likey

Largely agree, always more interested in how and whom we play down the stretch — but, when the starters are putting us in a hole, defending poorly, like 1st half against PU, and the guys who come in are killing it, and then staff just blindly go back to the starters in the 2d, as they did, that really bothers me. Blind adherence to the playbook needs to be avoided