AH1971

Mental gymnastics are exhausting

We’ve had two mainstays in the backcourt for the majority of those 3 years. Galloway and Johnson aren’t volume 3 point shooters because they aren’t 3 point shooters to begin with. Rice and Carlyle both attempted four 3pt/game as first year players, Galloway and XJ never attempted more than 3 in any of the years they played here. This isn’t hard. Woodson has shown he plays to his personnel. He bet on Xavier Johnson and got burnt. He’s going all in on young, dynamic guards who can not only create for themselves but for others. I’m willing to see that that through. It’s fine if you don’t want too, but that’s your prerogative however.

Crazy to think that just over 12 hours ago I was called a troll in the other thread for suggesting that having a more dynamic backcourt could lead to a more dynamic offense. What a time to be alive.

If outside shooting is still de-emphasized after landing guys like Rice and Carlyle and then potentially someone like Hickman, most people will get their wish and Woodson will be gone after the year. When guys like Leal, Cupps, and Galloway commandeer you’re backcourt for a majority of minutes, I know shooting 23-25 3P wouldn’t be my game plan.

Any good offense starts and stops with quality guard play regardless of the system, the style, or the pace in which you play. Bottom line. You have to have guys who can make shots. Hate to rag on some of the guys but our guards just flat sucked last year. And that burden falls on Woodson and it’s something he appears to be addressing this offseason. But this call for doom and gloom next year because of the “system” or the “style” or because “two bigs” irrespective of what happens in the portal is just lazy analysis.

Argumentative? It’s a message board, lighten up. I just acknowledged that lack of guard play last year was the reason for our offensive demise. And it had nothing to do with “playing through the post” or “playing 2 traditional bigs” but everything to do with poor guard/wing play. We weren’t a bad perimeter team because we “played through the post”, we were a bad perimeter team because we had guards who couldn’t shoot or create their own shot. Purdue played heavy minutes with two traditional bigs this past season as did Arizona two years ago with Tubelis and Ballo and yet both teams still yielded top 5 KenPom offenses.

I can’t physically pinpoint an exact percentage but they ran several sets a game where the ball would go into Clingan in the post and they’d run very sophisticated off-ball action to either free up a shooter or have a free lane cutter to the basket.

Exactly and why it’s hilarious watching all these people lose their collective minds about Ballo potentially coming. They’ve literally never watched him play. He’s not a guy who camps on the block and fed entry every trip down. He’s very good at lob PnR and being the bottom on high/low action. But understandably, there’s a quota several posters need to hit.

We’re about to find out aren’t we?

Again, from Freshman. Carlyle’s volume and efficiency numbers were identical to that of Fletcher Loyer his freshman season. Rice shot ~35% for nearly 80% of the season before he ended in a terrible slump. Unless you think freshman are capped after their first season, I’m not sure what else to tell you. I’d suggest you watch film on either instead of looking at box scores.

Clingan was the highest usage player on the team this last season as was Sonogo the year prior. And your comment is exactly what I’m talking about, passing it into the post and waiting for your 5 to shoot isn’t what playing through the post means.

You act as if playing through the post is some archaic system. News flash, there are literally dozens among dozens of teams “who play through the post” that still emphasize shooting from the perimeter, namely the two teams who played for the national title game Monday night. Also that Arizona team with Tubelis and Ballo included. “Playing through the post” does not literally mean ball goes in and doesn’t come out, no matter how much you want to think it does. I’m not sure what you saw out of our back court this last season that would make you think taking MORE perimeter shots would have lead to a better outcome? The personnel simply did not exist with that fault laying at the feet of Woodson. The new wave of guards the staff are coveting are of a completely different dynamic. Three level scorers of who can not only create for themselves but for others. I would expect the volume of perimeter shots to increase exponentially next year if we land our priority targets.

I watched him play against Duquesne and legitimately thought he was the worst basketball player that I had ever seen.

I didn’t realize that saying needing better guards was such a highly debated topic. Forgive me.

Thanks for the suggestion. I underestimated how many people it took to screw in a lightbulb.

A troll for talking about how better guards improve IU’s chances of being successful next year? Maybe we aren’t all on the same team?

If it doesn’t happen we’ll be looking for a new coach next year. I’ve said that repeatedly.

Acknowledging that better guards leads to better play is sunshine pumping?!?! I’ll ask you the same question that I asked him.

It’s not a completely different offensive system other than playing at a faster tempo. A more effective version sure, they had better guards. That’s obvious.

Stating the obvious such as improving guard play through the portal should make for a better offense is intentionally starting s***? My lord snowflake, are you that uncomfortable in your own skin?

I think it’s entirely possible to not be happy with how last year went while also acknowledging he’s going to be the coach next season. And rather than dwell and be a miserable person for the next 11 months, actually have articulate dialogue on how things can improve instead of just “It’S MiKE WOoDSoN……DErrrrrrr”

“I don’t want to talk to you unless you share the same opinion as me”. The richest message board fodder of all-time. Enjoy your weekend Chris.

I have zero problem with people holding the opinion that Mike Woodson needs to be fired just like I have zero issue participating in a thread where my opinion is in the minority. Doesn’t bother me at. It’s not however going to stop me from being objective.

Tubelis was a better version of Malik, didn’t insinuate otherwise, but their roles were eerily similar. They didn’t play 4 out. They played essentially two traditional bigs and made it work because they had guards (multiple) who could create their own shot. IU has had one guard in 3 years capable of doing such at a high level.

Lol