Juwan Moye

I won’t go back and forth with you on this one again, I’ll just hope you’re right and the last 3 years have been purely about personnel.

35? No, I don’t think either plays that many minutes. I do expect it to look like Ware/Reneau though and those two shared minutes. To add: When Ware was hurt early in the year, Woodson had a chance to play Reneau at the 5, but he instead opted to play Sparks. So my eyes believe what they see and over the last 3 years that’s been a consistent commitment to 2 big lineups.

I’ll do you one better: it’d be better than “not a bad thing” it would be a very good thing and would show a shift in approach from Woodson. Stuff like that would go a long way to showing he’s not as stubborn as many believe, myself included, and could be big in helping to galvanize the fan base. Here you all have gone and gotten me all excited. Need to go over to “that other thread” to temper myself.

Cool, he’s listed as a guard but for the sake of playing time, as long as the staff is ok playing him alongside 2 guards, it’s all the same to me.

So you’re saying the robots aren’t immediately taking all of our jobs.

Yep, if we don’t bring in a backup 4/5 guy then it makes sense. But if you do, and that guys is getting 10-15 minutes a game, then the minutes are gone. If we commit to more 3 guard looks though then yep, Goode at 15 minutes is reasonable. (Which was the point)

Cool, that was one of the points made my str8baller, that the staff would have to make a commitment to do such a thing. I hope they do, just not optimistic that they do. I expect our starters to be Rice, Carlyle, Mgbako, Reneau, Ballo and the bulk of the minutes for those 5 guys to be at their starting position.

I’ll rephrase the question: If we don’t play 3 guards consistently, how do you figure Goode gets 15MPG?

Based on what? That’s only viable if we play 3 guards consistently or one of our top 3 guards gets injured. The previous post by str8baller nailed this IMO.

You can drill down into individual player expectations a bit which is interesting, at least for this nerd. It helps provide some context for how the aggregated projection is put together.

I heard if Leal plays enough we’re guaranteed to win so you may be on to something…

We for sure still need a backup but that “should” be a very limited role if Reneau spends any meaningful time at the 5, otherwise it’s a 12-15 minutes per game role. I’d guess that’s well below what Payne wants.

I think a REALLY interesting question is “given the investment and influx of talent, what is an acceptable floor for this team?”. And my acceptable I mean “how well does this team have to do to continue to keep Woodson?”. I think a reasonable line here is a 6-seed in the tourney as that implies we’re a top-25 team. Not perfect by any means, but I’d be happy with it after enduring last season. I do worry that “make the tournament” will be seen as enough and the excuses will flow. Hopefully we have so much success that we all become big Mike Woodson fan boys by the middle of the B1G season and avoid these types of awful discussions next year/offseason.

Mike Woodson understands the analytics, no one understands the analytics better than Mike Woodson.

Jamie Shaw isn’t perfect by any means but he pretty quickly put that crystal ball in after he announced. Obviously nothing is 100% but this one feels pretty much done and it looks like a good fit for both sides.

This is talking about a potential transfer commit and how they’ll be used. You can feel something is “overblown”, doesn’t matter to me, it’s just what happened at the start of last year and caused way more issues than it needed to. I’d explain the issues it causes but this isn’t the thread for it.

Let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves. Chances are we hear this offseason how our “2nd unit is as good as our 1st unit” or some similar garbage that leads to a platoon system to start the year again. I do like the Goode pickup, think he fills a real need from a roster construction perspective, I’ll just still lack confidence that any shooter will be utilized correctly until Woodson proves he can adapt accordingly. My expectation is that Goode comes in and sits in the corner for 80%+ of plays and hopes to get the ball, similar to how we used Kopp.

Or just basic science. It’s not our coaches job to get guys shots, the best coach in the business said so.

The high watermark for Woody so far is 17.7. So let’s say we go crazy and take 20% more threes from that high, we’re still only at 21.2 or so. Last year was 15.5/game. I just don’t see a world where we increase that by ~50%. But for the sake of winning, and aesthetically pleasing basketball, I’d love to have AH1971 be right here. :)

Mayo Clinic (tried a handshake emoji but it’s not allowed)

I’d happily bet $100 that we don’t average 22+ three point attempts a game next season year.

Cool, believing that is fine. Hell, I’ll do you one better: I HOPE you’re right. But the probabilities aren’t on our side here so all of the things you believe will happen to turn us into a top-15 offensive unit CAN happen, it’s just unlikely that they do. If we can agree there then I’m more than happy. :)

So what sort of volume are you expecting? We took 15.5/game last year. I haven't done the math but I'm 99% sure that it still wont add up. 35% from three isnt a good number, thats average. For context, all 3 of Baylors starting guards were over 42% last season. THATS shooting.

The poster in question said “I’ll bet anything Reneau’s production stagnates if not dips with a better back court. He’s going to be playing out more on the perimeter anyway”. Which is at best a straw man as there’s zero evidence to support that Malik will “be playing out more on the perimeter”. You make a separate point which is “he’ll take more 3 point shots” which, may be the case, but given this whole discussion started from a proclamation that IU will have a top-15 offense, none of it really matters towards that. But more importantly: Fire Mike Woodson

Reading Twitter it looks like the player in question is Luke Goode. No clue if the rumor has any truth to it, it’s just what’s out there.