2018-2019 Rotation Discussion Thread

[MikeRoberts 7,030]

If Green starts over phinisee then I think McRoberts needs to start. He needs to play alongside 3 or 4 scorers. Morgan is a scorer, Langford is a scorer, Smith is a scorer, green is a scorer so having one guy out there that is a junkyard dog setting screens and getting tip-ins is ok.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[Old Friend 8,389]

13 minutes ago, rcs29 said:

1. You only start 5 players and you've listed 6. So which of those is the exception to the rule.

Exception to what rule?   You're creating a straw man argument.   I never said a word about how many minutes a sub can play.  You can either argue the point or you can't.  If you have to create a point in order to argue against it, you're not good at this.  Stop it.

2. Capela started every game he played and was 6th on the team in minutes.

Again, so what?  Not the point.  He averaged 30+ minutes in the playoffs...starter minutes. What's YOUR point?

3. Gordon started less than half of his games and was 4th in terms of MPG.

And again....so what?  This has never been debated.

4. Anderson started 3/4 of his games and was 7th.

Ryan Anderson did not start a single game in the playoffs.  He's not a starter for them.   He did start 50 times in the regular season, many due to injury, did not start in the other 16 games he played, and STILL played 26+ minutes in every game.  If you look at the ratio of minutes I gave as far as how many minutes starters play?   He fits.  Half the game to 2/3 of the game.  26 is more than half of 48 in case you need help with the math.

5. Neither Tucker or Capela avg. over 30 MPG

Both have in the post season.  And both 27+ in regular season, but you can nit pick if you feel like it.

So what is it you're not understanding about what I'm saying?  Pretty much everything.   Start saying relevant things.  You asked what successful team had starters that didn't play starters minutes, which in itself is subjective, and I'm giving you an example. You are....but you're also wrong.  And you're also giving examples that debate a point I'm not making.  But hey....well done.  That is unless you want to argue Gordon was a starter which would be a tough argument for you considering the available statistics that would strongly disagree. You seem quite capable of creating arguments for me.   I'll let you fight with the mirror some more.

Have anything else?  (I do wonder if anyone finds relevant a nit picky comparison with an NBA team relevant to this discussion, and if so, if they find your points compelling after they've been countered.  Methinks you may be on this hill by yourself.  Which will be entertaining.)

 

Sent from my Pixel XL using BtownBanners mobile app

 

 

 

 

[ElectricBoogaloo 4,307]

This is all getting a bit into the minutiae. I agree with the basic premise, which is: McRoberts playing 20+ minutes per game this year would signal we aren't as good/talented as we all thought heading into the season.

[Old Friend 8,389]

8 minutes ago, ElectricBoogaloo said:

This is all getting a bit into the minutiae. I agree with the basic premise, which is: McRoberts playing 20+ minutes per game this year would signal we aren't as good/talented as we all thought heading into the season.

Exceptional first sentence.  Some people just want to argue.  It sometimes takes minutiae in order to satisfy that craving, and I find it sporty to counter.   My apologies for my role in it, however sometimes...a good debate is needed for some.

[Brass Cannon 24,854]

People disagree with that basic premise. The top 2 teams in the big ten leaned heavily on players similar to McRoberts. 

There is no reason to use him playing as a knock on the team 

[rcbowla 7,132]

Exceptional first sentence.  Some people just want to argue.  It sometimes takes minutiae in order to satisfy that craving, and I find it sporty to counter.   My apologies for my role in it, however sometimes...a good debate is needed for some.

"Some people"? A majority of your posts are argumentative or to rebut an opposing point. But hey you coached for 20+ years and I'm sure you DRIVE A DODGE STRATUS! Seriously though I really don't think your coaching longevity gives your "opinion" instant validity like you would want all of us to believe. Learn to accept differing opinions and be able to move on.

Sent from my Pixel XL using BtownBanners mobile app

[Old Friend 8,389]

Just now, Brass Cannon said:

People disagree with that basic premise. The top 2 teams in the big ten leaned heavily on players similar to McRoberts. 

There is no reason to use him playing as a knock on the team 

This is not accurate.   You can dig and find what some may find "similarities," but the top 2 Big Ten teams did not rely on players who are no threat at all to score.   Similar (if you reach) stat lines do not make them similar players.

[Old Friend 8,389]

9 minutes ago, rcs29 said:

"Some people"? A majority of your posts are argumentative or to rebut an opposing point. But hey you coached for 20+ years and I'm sure you DRIVE A DODGE STRATUS! Seriously though I really don't think your coaching longevity gives your "opinion" instant validity like you would want all of us to believe. Learn to accept differing opinions and be able to move on.

Sent from my Pixel XL using BtownBanners mobile app
 

No....they really kind of aren't.  Take a look back at this thread and let me know whose tone was argumenative.    Hell, take a look at THIS post.  A Dodge Stratus?   Really?  That's all you have?  (2014 Ford Explorer Platinum if you need to know)  

You've now gotten off the point, which tells me a whole lot and you're telling me to accept your fabricated comparison and change my tone when you're the guy who took an argumenative tone to begin with.   (I do love the basic statement "accept my opinion...dammit" stance.)  Sorry, pal.  You fire, I'm firing back.  Go back and read.  My first post started out "All due respect to Brass Cannon...."   And my next ones were polite.  My last to you?  No, but put the blame where it belongs.

For the record, I don't care one bit whether or not my background gives me validity.  I would think the facts would, as would history, but maybe not.  Maybe you can't see past the style.  I'm nothing but a guy next to you on a bar stool.  Go with that or assume something else.  Your call.

Now...back on point or...not?

[Brass Cannon 24,854]

9 minutes ago, Old Friend said:

This is not accurate.   You can dig and find what some may find "similarities," but the top 2 Big Ten teams did not rely on players who are no threat at all to score.   Similar (if you reach) stat lines do not make them similar players.

Simiar talent level. And as stated several times you don't need scoring from all 5 starters. Every shot McRoberts takes will be one less for Morgan, Smith and Romeo. 

Wisconsin started Josh Gasser 40 games in 2015. The guy averaged a point every 5 minutes. Hardly a threat to score

[Hardwood83 4,774]

I've mentioned before that I doubt the starting line-up for the opening game is the same as it will be in January. I also seriously doubt 2+ Freshmen start (barring extenuating circumstances.) I think Phinisee and Hunter will be major contributors, but don't expect them to start, especially right away. Based on Archie's comments at Huber, experience and understanding the system are important and I'm skeptical that  2-3 Freshmen are all going to pull that off. 

I could see McRoberts starting on occasion, especially early in the season, but agree that isn't the most hopeful sign for a big year. 

The good news is IU has a lot more options than last year and the future is bright! 

 

[Old Friend 8,389]

2 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

Simiar talent level. And as stated several times you don't need scoring from all 5 starters. Every shot McRoberts takes will be one less for Morgan, Smith and Romeo. 

Wisconsin started Josh Gasser 40 games in 2015. The guy averaged a point every 5 minutes. Hardly a threat to score

No...you don't.  I agree with that argument and never said you do.  The difference in what I did say is subtle, but significant because of the way teams defend you.   A guy who isn't a threat allows a player to float and make things more difficult for everyone else.

But I disagree with his playing starter minutes in this case because he isn't even a threat to score.   Do I think it matters if he starts the game?   No.    But starting the game and playing starter minutes are different things.   I think if we need McRoberts to play 20+ minutes every night, we're in trouble.  There are only 200 minutes to go around; and last season we needed him.  Different season, different team.

I like him.  As I have said multiple times.  I truly do.  He has a role, and it may be a significant role.  But now that we have added 6 new faces (counting Thompson), all of whom are more athletic and talented than McRoberts is, I believe his role should diminish because we don't need him as much as we did a season ago.  

Josh Gasser averaged ~ 7 PPG from his sophomore season through his senior season.  He also took 180+ shots per season after his freshman year.  He was a threat.   McRoberts took 68 shots and is not a threat.  McRoberts averaged 2.8 a year ago, and as I said, 1/3rd of his points came against 3 teams...IPFW, Tennessee Tech, and Youngstown State; otherwise, he averages about 1.9 PPG.  Not a valid comparison to Gasser.

[rcbowla 7,132]

Just in case people haven't seen this:

Sent from my Pixel XL using BtownBanners mobile app

[JSHoosier 20,297]

I like McRoberts and he has some value, but if we're relying on him as heavily as last season then something went wrong.  He doesn't really excel at anything but his IQ and hustle lets him make the small plays, and there is value there; he does need to at least be able to keep the defense honest though or you playing 4 on 5.

[Brass Cannon 24,854]

5 minutes ago, Old Friend said:

No...you don't.  I agree with that argument and never said you do.  The difference in what I did say is subtle, but significant because of the way teams defend you.   A guy who isn't a threat allows a player to float and make things more difficult for everyone else.

But I disagree with his playing starter minutes in this case because he isn't even a threat to score.   Do I think it matters if he starts the game?   No.    But starting the game and playing starter minutes are different things.   I think if we need McRoberts to play 20+ minutes every night, we're in trouble.  There are only 200 minutes to go around; and last season we needed him.  Different season, different team.

I like him.  As I have said multiple times.  I truly do.  He has a role, and it may be a significant role.  But now that we have added 6 new faces (counting Thompson), all of whom are more athletic and talented than McRoberts is, I believe his role should diminish because we don't need him as much as we did a season ago.  

Josh Gasser averaged ~ 7 PPG from his sophomore season through his senior season.  He also took 180+ shots per season after his freshman year.  He was a threat.   McRoberts took 68 shots and is not a threat.  McRoberts averaged 2.8 a year ago, and as I said, 1/3rd of his points came against 3 teams...IPFW, Tennessee Tech, and Youngstown State; otherwise, he averages about 1.9 PPG.  Not a valid comparison to Gasser.

Gasser averaged 8 points per 40 minutes. Mcroberts is like 6 points per 40 minutes

That is in no way shape or form a significant difference. 

[Brass Cannon 24,854]

At the end of the day i think Fitzner starts and Mcroberts comes off the bench. 

Assuming Thompson is ready to contribute we will start Smith, Morgan and Fitzner. With there being heated conpetition for the rest of the minutes in the front court  

Romeo starts obviously  beginning to suspect Phinisee will also start  with heated competition for bench Minutes  

 

[Old Friend 8,389]

25 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

Gasser averaged 8 points per 40 minutes. Mcroberts is like 6 points per 40 minutes

That is in no way shape or form a significant difference. 

You're nit picking.  Gasser took 3x the number of shots, and scored 3.5x the number of points.  His role was different.  He was a threat.  McRoberts is not a threat.  You're splitting hairs in order to make a point.  

[Old Friend 8,389]

9 minutes ago, Brass Cannon said:

At the end of the day i think Fitzner starts and Mcroberts comes off the bench. 

Assuming Thompson is ready to contribute we will start Smith, Morgan and Fitzner. With there being heated conpetition for the rest of the minutes in the front court  

Romeo starts obviously  beginning to suspect Phinisee will also start  with heated competition for bench Minutes  

 

This makes the overall point.   I'm reading this wondering why you're expending so much energy comparing McRoberts w Josh Gasser; because this is what I'm saying....and what I'll stand by.  Indiana does not need McRoberts to play as many minutes this season as last, and there are now more talented players available to start and play more minutes.  He is a walk on because his level was Vermont; and his numbers as a freshman there suggested that fit was a good one.  At a place like Indiana, in a year where they have high aspirations; his role shouldn't be as large and he shouldn't start nor play starter minutes on THIS team.

[Brass Cannon 24,854]

5 minutes ago, Old Friend said:

You're nit picking.  Gasser took 3x the number of shots, and scored 3.5x the number of points.  His role was different.  He was a threat.  McRoberts is not a threat.  You're splitting hairs in order to make a point.  

No i am not nit picking. Im using the per 40 stat for what its intended for. To correct for imbalances in playing time. 

Zack played in 12 fewer games and and fewer minutes per game. Of course his totals and per game are going to be off. 

You are just biased and are excluding data that doesnt back up your point. 

The root issue in 40 minutes of basketball gasser gave about 8 points. Mcroberts just shy of 6. Not that substantially. 

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

17 hours ago, Old Friend said:

I think everyone disagrees with me on #2.  Maybe #1, too because people (rightfully) fell in love w McRoberts.  Yep...he is a winning player, but on a team with as much talent and athletic ability as this one has, I see him as a far bigger contributor off the bench than I do playing starter's minutes.

Shockingly enough, I agree and have said the same thing. If McRoberts is starting, it better be because he figured out that he's allowed to score.

[Brass Cannon 24,854]

3 minutes ago, Old Friend said:

This makes the overall point.   I'm reading this wondering why you're expending so much energy comparing McRoberts w Josh Gasser; because this is what I'm saying....and what I'll stand by.  Indiana does not need McRoberts to play as many minutes this season as last, and there are now more talented players available to start and play more minutes.  He is a walk on because his level was Vermont; and his numbers as a freshman there suggested that fit was a good one.  At a place like Indiana, in a year where they have high aspirations; his role shouldn't be as large and he shouldn't start nor play starter minutes on THIS team.

Im not using energy and my point is your reasoning is flawed anout McRoberts your biased because hes a walk on and frankly you are overly biased towards points scored not giving fair value to defense, passing and rebounding.