Jump to content

Thanks for visiting BtownBanners.com!  We noticed you have AdBlock enabled.  While ads can be annoying, we utilize them to provide these forums free of charge to you!  Please consider removing your AdBlock for BtownBanners or consider signing up to donate and help BtownBanners stay alive!  Thank you!

5fouls

Members
  • Content Count

    35
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by 5fouls


  1. Just now, rayl456 said:

    Gibberish... pure and simple.  :)  Numbers don't tell the story 5fouls!  You, of ALL people, know that!

    I think it's safe to say that, both players, playing behind All-Americans, have more to show us than they were able to do so this past season.  


  2. 12 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

    The logical choices to leave Purdue or Newman, Furst, and Trey Kaufman.

    I’m not much of a fan of Newman at all. Talented enough but game doesn’t seem to really click for him.

    Furst is pretty active and quite good. I feel like in the right situation has the five he could be a winning player.

    Kaufman is interesting to me also. He’s only had one year of college ball and his size and outside shot form are intriguing. However, he was mediocre at best his freshman year.

    I could wrap my brain around either of their big guys.

    Kaufman-Renn's advanced metrics are actually better than Reneau's

    TKR

    • PER - 17.0
    • W/S Per 40 - .151
    • Box +/- = 3.2
    • ORating - 111.2
    • DRating - 99.6

    Malik

    • PER - 16.7
    • W/S Per 40 - .122
    • Box +/- = 1.0
    • ORating - 103.7
    • DRating - 99.3

  3. 10 hours ago, Southside said:

    Saw your similar post in the other thread so responding to both. 

    Stanford has a lot of great qualities no doubt. But their FB and BB have both declined. But more importantly, the realignment looks to be 99% about football TV and market capture. Stanford FB stands are pitiful at times, and their overall fan enthusiasm is pretty low. Read that their viewership was more about national viewers, and less about the Bay (USC and UCLA are watched just as much there). Having UCLA and USC more or less captures Cali, and has the national kicker as well. I would not be shocked at all if they did end up in the B10 though. Maybe a little surprised. 

    But this is all about personal preference, so let your Stanford flag fly :-) 

    It can't ALL be about football.  Overall health of the conference has to be considered.  Let's say the Big Ten makes it all about Football and to get to 20 they add Notre Dame, Oregon, Clemson, and Oklahoma State.  Those are probably the 4 best realistic football options out there.  Who does the group of teams hurt?  It hurts schools like Wisconsin, Iowa, Michigan State, etc. that have to do everything right to compete with OSU, Michigan and PSU today.  Add 4 more top shelf programs into the mix and whatever opportunities the Iowa's of the world had before, they are much less now.

    Having 2 of the 4 additions be football-centric makes sense (Notre Dame and Oregon).  Have the other two additions be about something else.  Stanford raises the academic profile and has a strong overall athletic program.  Washington (or Cal, if you prefer) would add a 5th team on the West Coast to help balance out the schedule and reduce travel.

    Quite frankly, the thought of adding a team like Clemson to the Big Ten is crazy to me.  The school brings nothing outside of football (maybe a little baseball) to the table.  

    You simply can't have 16 of the 20 football teams in the conference be national title threats  It simply does not work that way.  

     


  4. Other than the Pac 12, there honestly is not 4 teams from any of those conferences I would take.

    In the ACC I would be okay with UNC, Virginia, or Georgia Tech.

    In the Pac 12, Stanford (#1 choice), Cal (if it helps get Stanford, Oregon, and Washington are all okay.  

    Honestly, nobody from the Big 12 interests me at all.  Nebraska level athletics at best with less than optimum academics.

     


  5. I voted Stanford.  Every conference team cant be a football standout.  The fact is that Stanford has more National Championships across all sports than any other school.  And, it grabs the Bay Area tv market.  

    To me, it's pretty simple.  Add ND and 3 west coast schools to get to 20.  Break conference into four separate 5 team pods.

    UNC loses a LOT of value if not packaged with Duke.


  6. 33 minutes ago, Hardwood83 said:

    Herbstreit sees teams like IU football eventually getting kicked out of the club: Daily Hoosier article

    Just read the article.  Not sure his comments about getting left out include IU.  Current  Power 5 teams like Washington State, Oregon State, Wake Forest, Duke, Kansas, etc could be in serious  trouble.

     I think already being in the Big Ten insulates IU, PU, and NW.  If IU was currently in the Pac12 or Big12 instead?  Yeah, that would be time to worry.

    A lot depends on the size of the breakaway.  If it's 32 teams, IU has no chance.  If it's 48, we are on the bubble.  If it's 55+, we have very little to worry about.


  7. 3 hours ago, AKHoosier said:

    Highly doubt it.

    Silicon Valley doesn't care about Stanford athletics all that much. They don't have a huge national following either. 

    Stanford doesn't add much outside of academics.

    Stanford has the most NCAA Championships than of any school.  More than twice as many as any current Big Ten school.


  8. 2 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

    I would think you would have to find a way that you play UCLA and USC on the road in the same year as well as home the next year but probably wouldn't work out.  Also why do you have Notre Dame in the conference instead of Maryland 

    My version says Maryland.  Why does your version say Notre Dame?  :coffee:


  9. 9 minutes ago, HoosierAloha said:

    What are we thinking for travel partners in the new Big 10 (16)?

    UCLA-USC
    Michigan schools
    Rutger-Maryland
    PSU-O$U
    Indiana schools
    Ill schools
    Minny-Wiscy
    Iowa-Neb


    Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

     

    8 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

    To me if we have 16 teams we need the go back to having traveling partners like they use to have. 

    Rutgers/Maryland

    PSU/OSU 

    IU/PU 

    UM/MSU 

    UI/NW

    UW/Minn. 

    Iowa/Neb. 

    UCLA/USC 

    If you play a 20 conference game season then you play 10 teams once and 5 teams twice. You play your travel partner twice a year and two other travel partners twice and the other sets once.

     

    Travel partners are very hard to do without a round-robin schedule.

    Take Scott's example for instance.  Assume IU's twice a year pods year one are Purdue, as well as Rutgers/Maryland and OSU/PSU.  Now, assume our 1 game road pods are UM\MSU and UI/NW.  Then say our 1 game home pods are UW/Minn and Iowa/Nebraska.  At that point we have played 9 home games and 9 road games.  But, there is only 1 pod left.  The USC/UCLA pod is split at that point.  

     


  10. Looking down the road to the inevitable Super-Conference concept.

    Where does IU fit in such a hierarchy?   It's a football driven concept after all.  

    I'm indifferent to UCLA and USC.  If you're going to take the plunge, those are two good schools to start with.  But, the overall concept of Super-Conferences is bad for teams with subpar football programs, and that group includes IU.  


  11. 18 minutes ago, go iu bb said:

    TJD extending his range is good for the team because helps to open up the lane. This helps players like Galloway and Johnson who like to drive to the basket. It also makes TJD himself harder to guard which is good for the team. 

    It hurts the team if TJD shoots 48% from the field instead of 60% from the field.  Those other guys can still drive the lane with a properly executed high ball screen.  


  12. 21 minutes ago, HoosierHoopster said:

    What do you guys think are the keys to IU living up to the pre-season rankings / expectations?

    - growth/increased production of JG, Bates and/Galloway- more outside shooting 

    - JHS’s immediate impact as point/combo guard

    - TJD taking another step up with mid-range / outside shooting

    - crazy depth up front with TJD, Race, JG and Ren?

    - other?

    I think how good we can be is going to largely depend on one or more of JG, Bates and Galloway having that real jump up in their games / contributions  (i agree with Goodman … ewww)

    First and foremost, it's improved outside shooting for almost everyone on the team. 

    That said, I'm reluctant to see TJD attempt to expand his game by taking more jumpers.  While it may be a benefit to his pro career, for IU's season,  it has the makings of an experiment gone bad.  

    I think players accepting roles will be another key.  Potential for a numbers crunch and it will be critical that guys that get squeezed look long term.

    Improvement from Coach Woodson on his substitution patterns.  No hockey line changes.  Have 2 starters on floor at all times.

    Limit turnovers.  We will hold an edge in most games if we are equal to our opponent in taking care of the ball.  Give them 5 extra possessions a game and anything can happen.


  13. 1 hour ago, Honkyman said:

    My point that Bates has a long way to go before he is IU's "most reliable 3-point shooter" needs no examples and cannot be denied. That his 3-point shooting needs substantial improvement is evident by his 3-point percentage. In addition to Kopp, I could have included others like Xavier Johnson and Parker Stewart who like Kopp shot better shooting more 3s than Bates. My point is that at 29.8% Bates last season was no where near being a reliable 3-point shooter. Like all IU fans, I hope he improves. Bates certainly has talent, we all agree. But to assert that IU needs Bates to be its most reliable 3-point shooter next season is ridiculous. (is he suggesting that IU needs Bates to be its most reliable 3-point shooter in order to be successful this coming season?). I'll leave it at I hope Bates improves enough with his 3-point shooting that it helps the team.

    What I said is 'For IU to be as successful as it can be', Bates needs to be its most reliable 3-point shooter.  I say that, not to be ridiculous, but I'll help by pointing out some obvious reasons why.

    • Schifino is a freshman and not known to be a shooter
    • XJ is our point guard.  While he showed last year he can shoot the 3, your point guard needs to running the offense instead of trying to spot up for 3. 
    • Bates can create his own shot better than Kopp
    • Galloway, for all his skills, will never be a good shooter.  He will get open looks for a reason.
    • I want Geronimo crashing the offensive boards more than I want him spotting up from outside
    • If Bates does not improve, Race may actually end up being our most reliable 3-point shooter. That's not necessarily a good thing.
    • Leal likely won't get sufficient minutes to make a difference game in and game out.

    Is 29% going to cut it?  No.  But, if he Bates shoots that, we are a fringe Top 20 team instead of a potential Top 10 team.  That's my point.  It's not like we have a team full of Alfords, Hulls, Roths and Zeislofts to fall back on. 

    Let's revisit this discussion at the end of the year.  If Bates can shoot something like 38%, we'll be talking about how critical that was to the team's success.  If he shoots 30%, we'll be talking about how much better the team would have been if he shot better.  Kopp is the only other option that seems capable of filling that outside shooting void.  And, in my estimation, if Bates beats Kopp out for starts/minutes, IU will be better for it.   

     

     


  14. 25 minutes ago, Honkyman said:

    I agree that is the likely starting lineup at the beginning of the season. The starting lineup could change depending upon player performance or Woodson could simply go to the bench earlier than last season. The real issue is which players are on the floor at the end of close games.

    I think Tamar Bates is who we need to see starting at the 3 slot.  He may or may not earn it.  But, for IU to be as good as it can be, that's what needs to happen.  He needs to be our most reliable 3 point shooter.


  15. 15 hours ago, Stuhoo said:

     

    Goodman updates his early Top 25 and we are now at #9.

    Wanna talk bluebloods? He has us ahead of UK, Kansas, and Duke.

     

     

    I don't think we're Top 10 unless someone (most likely Bates) takes a big step forward and becomes a consistent perimeter scorer.  We may get into the Top 10 early in the season as younger teams are still figuring things out.  But, by the end of the year, if we have not become a better shooting team from the arc, I have to think there will be at least 10 teams better.  If I had to make a prediction, I would guess a 4 seed in the NCAA tournament.  


  16. You ever have those situations where you expect something to happen, but your brain convinces you the exact opposite will happen?  That's where I am at with TJD.  I fully expect him to return to IU.  Every indicator points that way and I can't come up with one single thing to cause me to believe otherwise.  I expect him to come back.  Yet, my brain is hard selling the opposite.  

×