IU Prof

I agree that Harbaugh served as a potential parallel, although he was much more accomplished at the same juncture than Woodson. The bigger difference with Harbaugh, though, is that he was willing to look in the mirror and try to improve his own shortcomings. Some of that was personality, bonding more with players, etc. But he was also willing to revamp his defensive scheme. And he let go of some established assistants on the offensive side too to get new blood into the program. Woodson has publicly shown no willingness to self reflect and address the ways in which his style and scheme are contributing to his underwhelming performance. He just thinks he needs to upgrade talent, and that his outdated system will still work. So while I think the results next year are likely to be better than last, I still don't see this program breaking through in a big way as long as it runs the same offensive and defensive systems.

Not sure how anyone could have watched this coaching staff operate the last three years and think that because IU suddenly has Rice and Carlyle in the backcourt that that will lead to a significantly increased 3 point shooting volume. IU has had playmakers, shooters, etc., over the last three years and still played post dominant. They just spent $1+ million on Ballo, and lord knows how much to retain Reneau. The offense is still going to be post dominant.

https://twitter.com/TiptonEdits/status/1781792601307295917

My thoughts too...definitely a different tenor than last time.

https://hardwoodhoudini.com/posts/brad-stevens-addresses-rumor-leave-boston-celtics-indiana-hoosiers

Man, some of you really ought to be charging NGW rent given the degree to which he's living in your heads...

I think Conwell's NIT run pretty conclusively settles whether his talent can play up a level.

I'm not a fan of the apparent portal strategy, but Rice is the exception. Great story, great talent, great get.

Would love to hear @JerryYeagley23 weigh in on this Stevens scuttlebutt...

That's totally fair. But on the other hand, it's hard not to point out the coaching deficiencies when people start talking about most talented team in the B1G, etc.

I'm not sure the hypothetical roster you laid out is best in the B1G. That's what I was saying. Yes, though, I agree it is better than last year. But last year isn't the only year I'm talking about. From my vantage point, IU has under performed from a results perspective versus its talent level (even if lacking in places) all three years under Woodson. So I see no reason next year will change that. Put differently, this group might get Woodson into a 5-8 seed range for the NCAA, but he isn't taking it to an Elite 8 or Final 4.

Agree with the first part. But I think that for Carlyle at least, his recruiting ranking is most of the appeal. Otherwise, you're looking at a SG who shot 38.7% from the field and 32% from 3. Yes he was a freshman, but he'd be going from a defensively suspect PAC-12 to the B1G.

Agree in general, but there's also more to roster construction than just "good guards" or "bad guards". With Reneau and Ballo clogging the paint, Carlyle won't have the driving lanes needed to thrive. And from the video I've seen, he needs to do a lot of work on his form (shooting base in particluar) to become the consistent 3 point threat the rest of this hypothetical roster needs at the 2.

Don't know yet, there's still a lot TBD. But the broader point is that a lack of talent hasn't been IU's biggest issue the last few years. Style and coaching has. So I'm not sure that group really moves the needle that much over prior years.

What percentage of minutes did UConn simultaneously play two low post dominant bigs?

I saw a recruiting star based analysis that said we were the most talented team in the B1G last year, and we all saw how that ended.

Except UConn didn't play 2 bigs. Karaban was the 4. Completely different player and skill set than Reneau.

This is all correct. Unfortunately, the bolded part is the key. And that's something that Woodson has never shown any ability or interest in implementing. Instead, he sticks shooters in the corner and has them stand there for the entire possession. UConn ran an extremely complex and dynamic modern offensive system. IU plays through the post in a 1990s sense. Two completely different animals, to the point that analogizing them is offensive to what Hurley has implemented.

Why'd it take him 3 years to figure that out?

Root for the Celtics to win the championship, then? Does that check a box for him?

I don't see a top 25 offense with that collection of talent. Rice, Carlyle, and Galloway are going to find driving lanes to the rim few and far between with Reneau and Ballo clogging the paint. And Mbgako is the only (semi) reliable 3 point shooter out of that bunch. Maybe top 40?

There are reasonable arguments as to why Tucker would be expected to start (pedigree, desire to get to league sooner). But there are also reasonable arguments as to why that may be unlikely (age, roster construction). Unless you are connected to the staff or player, all we can really do is guess at this point.

But then why would you want him?

Would Purdue winning the title light a fire under IU the way Michigan winning it all in football did for Ohio State?