Random Archie/Basketball Talk

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

Also - no comment on Archie’s player development. Al progressed, Deron has some sweet new moves under the basket, and Juwan looks like he made improvements as well. Many of the rest look the same. Devonte actually shows bursts of progress too, but reverts back to his flawed play often.

I think this is another wait and see, mostly looking at the freshman and next recruiting class.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[Old Friend 8,389]

7 minutes ago, Walking Boot of Doom said:

Also - no comment on Archie’s player development. Al progressed, Deron has some sweet new moves under the basket, and Juwan looks like he made improvements as well. Many of the rest look the same. Devonte actually shows bursts of progress too, but reverts back to his flawed play often.

I think this is another wait and see, mostly looking at the freshman and next recruiting class.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

Love Durham and yes he has developed nicely.  Same w Deron.  I don't agree on DeVonte, but that's another discussion.   Whole thing's a crap shoot until we see what Archie does between now and 2021, I'd say.   I'm 100% with you if the talent stays for a couple of years or if we get the guys who can dominate a season like Carmelo Anthony did or like Zion Williamson is doing.   And yeah, I get the Romeo thing, too.   I've just been upset with what looks to be a separation from what's important to the development of Indiana University Men's Basketball to what's important to Romeo Langford.   You know I agree with recruiting in state, but you still have to get the right kids.  Not every kid fits.

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

7 hours ago, Old Friend said:

Love Durham and yes he has developed nicely.  Same w Deron.  I don't agree on DeVonte, but that's another discussion.   Whole thing's a crap shoot until we see what Archie does between now and 2021, I'd say.   I'm 100% with you if the talent stays for a couple of years or if we get the guys who can dominate a season like Carmelo Anthony did or like Zion Williamson is doing.   And yeah, I get the Romeo thing, too.   I've just been upset with what looks to be a separation from what's important to the development of Indiana University Men's Basketball to what's important to Romeo Langford.   You know I agree with recruiting in state, but you still have to get the right kids.  Not every kid fits.

Yes, if Romeo is exhibiting, call it, the toxic one and done behaviors... that's incredibly disappointing. I choose to believe that he's not though, given all we heard about the kid coming into his time at Indiana. Regardless, it's February 2019 and he's about four months out from the biggest night of his life thus far - it's got to be difficult to remain focused on the task at hand, especially when anyone can see it's going to take more than four months to fix Indiana's problems.

On 2021 - sounds crazy, but I absolutely agree. Everyone knew we were undergoing a massive culture shift switching from Crean to Archie. Indiana fans of all people should realize as well that there's only a handful of right ways to succeed at Indiana, especially if we're to remain "clean". 

I know discussing "giving Archie years" get's people upset, but culture isn't a thing you go out and acquire. You know you established a culture when you see the same trends year over year over year. Consistency is key, and that's why regardless of who the coach is it will take years to understand if they're successful or not at Indiana. 

[TXHoosierDaddy 1,375]

2 hours ago, Walking Boot of Doom said:

Yes, if Romeo is exhibiting, call it, the toxic one and done behaviors... that's incredibly disappointing. I choose to believe that he's not though, given all we heard about the kid coming into his time at Indiana. Regardless, it's February 2019 and he's about four months out from the biggest night of his life thus far - it's got to be difficult to remain focused on the task at hand, especially when anyone can see it's going to take more than four months to fix Indiana's problems.

On 2021 - sounds crazy, but I absolutely agree. Everyone knew we were undergoing a massive culture shift switching from Crean to Archie. Indiana fans of all people should realize as well that there's only a handful of right ways to succeed at Indiana, especially if we're to remain "clean". 

I know discussing "giving Archie years" get's people upset, but culture isn't a thing you go out and acquire. You know you established a culture when you see the same trends year over year over year. Consistency is key, and that's why regardless of who the coach is it will take years to understand if they're successful or not at Indiana. 

This is a very tough pill to swallow. In today's landscape, patience is often dismissed very early on. If you look at many of the successful coaches it often takes a while to build the program. Indiana fans have already had to endure a lot of patience with the Crean years. Just to play devils advocate let's look at a few coaches that have inherited a less than talented roster and have already been able to turn things around quite fast. 

Will Wade - LSU

Year 1 -18-15

Year 2 - 20-4

Eric Musselman - Nevada

Year 1 - 24-14

Year 2 - 28-7

Year 3 - 19-1

Rick Barnes - Tennessee

Year 1 - 15-19

Year 2 - 16-16

Year 3 - 26-9

Chris Beard - Texas Tech

Year 1 - 18-14

Year 2 - 27-10

Year 3 - 19-5

It's not always apples to apples as far as resources available to turn the program around faster. Archie seems to have been really restricted with the APR hit and guys transferring. I also know there are examples like Tony Bennett and John Beilein that prove that Archie needs at least a few more years before we can really judge. However, the guys above were all dealt a hand that wasn't that great and each turned it around within 3 years so it is possible to do. All of those destinations are less attractive than IU. 

[Andrew_114 105]

This is a very tough pill to swallow. In today's landscape, patience is often dismissed very early on. If you look at many of the successful coaches it often takes a while to build the program. Indiana fans have already had to endure a lot of patience with the Crean years. Just to play devils advocate let's look at a few coaches that have inherited a less than talented roster and have already been able to turn things around quite fast. 
Will Wade - LSU
Year 1 -18-15
Year 2 - 20-4
Eric Musselman - Nevada
Year 1 - 24-14
Year 2 - 28-7
Year 3 - 19-1
Rick Barnes - Tennessee
Year 1 - 15-19
Year 2 - 16-16
Year 3 - 26-9
Chris Beard - Texas Tech
Year 1 - 18-14
Year 2 - 27-10
Year 3 - 19-5
It's not always apples to apples as far as resources available to turn the program around faster. Archie seems to have been really restricted with the APR hit and guys transferring. I also know there are examples like Tony Bennett and John Beilein that prove that Archie needs at least a few more years before we can really judge. However, the guys above were all dealt a hand that wasn't that great and each turned it around within 3 years so it is possible to do. All of those destinations are less attractive than IU. 

None of those coaches play in the B1G or ACC either. Big difference getting wins in the SEC Big12 or Mid major conf.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk

[TXHoosierDaddy 1,375]

3 minutes ago, Andrew_114 said:

None of those coaches play in the B1G or ACC either. Big difference getting wins in the SEC Big12 or Mid major conf.

Sent from my Pixel 3 using Tapatalk
 

The way we are playing now we would be losing to lots of teams in the Big 12 and SEC. 

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

See, resources is a consideration, but I think Indiana's struggles are around the severity of the identity shift with a "hangover" roster. Archie is a system coach and is shifting Indiana from a run-and-gun offensive focused identity to a principled defensive focused identity.

Just a more dramatic shift than most programs, in my opinion, but I haven’t dug into a lot of the ones listed above.

 

[Old Friend 8,389]

16 minutes ago, Walking Boot of Doom said:

See, resources is a consideration, but I think Indiana's struggles are around the severity of the identity shift with a "hangover" roster. Archie is a system coach and is shifting Indiana from a run-and-gun offensive focused identity to a principled defensive focused identity.

Just a more dramatic shift than most programs, in my opinion, but I have dug into a lot of the ones listed above.

As much as I love the toughness/defensive mentality; and was around it through the Knight years; his teams also led the Big Ten in scoring almost every year, despite what his roster looked like.   Indiana can't score in the half court.  We don't even GET good shots much of the time, and it seems kids who make mistake after mistake aren't held accountable; and kids who should be more ready to contribute by now.....aren't.  

If Chris Holtmann didn't have Ohio State at 16-7, I might be more willing to "be patient," but I don't think it's too much to ask for a coach to get his team to compete at a pretty high level in year 2.  I do understand it can take time; but with Morgan, Davis, Durham, and Green....we had 4 returning players who, when new faces were also added, should - in my mind - be better than losing 9 of 10 games, three of them against Nebraska, Rutgers, and Northwestern; plus a very beatable Ohio State team at home.  We win those 4?  We're 17-7 and I don't think anyone's upset.  But lose all of them for myriad reasons, and the natives are rightfully restless. 

Offense doesn't move much; some defensive players are lazy and out of position; and I don't see coaching.  In fact, I see at least one assistant who basically stands with his hands in his pockets.  I think there are problems.  I wish I saw the light at the end of the tunnel and a great direction; but right now, I just don't.  I'm willing to hold off judgement for a couple of seasons, but next season should really begin to show growth, regardless of the roster.  We'll have enough players to compete and win more than we are now.

[mdn82 25,510]

As much as I love the toughness/defensive mentality; and was around it through the Knight years; his teams also led the Big Ten in scoring almost every year, despite what his roster looked like.   Indiana can't score in the half court.  We don't even GET good shots much of the time, and it seems kids who make mistake after mistake aren't held accountable; and kids who should be more ready to contribute by now.....aren't.  
If Chris Holtmann didn't have Ohio State at 16-7, I might be more willing to "be patient," but I don't think it's too much to ask for a coach to get his team to compete at a pretty high level in year 2.  I do understand it can take time; but with Morgan, Davis, Durham, and Green....we had 4 returning players who, when new faces were also added, should - in my mind - be better than losing 9 of 10 games, three of them against Nebraska, Rutgers, and Northwestern; plus a very beatable Ohio State team at home.  We win those 4?  We're 17-7 and I don't think anyone's upset.  But lose all of them for myriad reasons, and the natives are rightfully restless. 
Offense doesn't move much; some defensive players are lazy and out of position; and I don't see coaching.  In fact, I see at least one assistant who basically stands with his hands in his pockets.  I think there are problems.  I wish I saw the light at the end of the tunnel and a great direction; but right now, I just don't.  I'm willing to hold off judgement for a couple of seasons, but next season should really begin to show growth, regardless of the roster.  We'll have enough players to compete and win more than we are now.

What coaching style, both in tempo and offense/defense does Holtman run versus Thad Matta? You know he developed the Butler way right? Stevens was an assistant who adopted his playing style. Holtman and Archie both have ties to this system. When Holtman went to OSU he had a 5* Senior and other valuable pieces where he didn’t have to create a new culture. He stepped in and ran. Much like Archie would have done there. The culture was what Butler and Xavier had been the last 15 years. They just needed a new voice. We needed a new culture.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[mdn82 25,510]

Sorry just realized it’s the Keion thread.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners

[Old Friend 8,389]

15 minutes ago, mdn82 said:

What coaching style, both in tempo and offense/defense does Holtman run versus Thad Matta? You know he developed the Butler way right? Stevens was an assistant who adopted his playing style. Holtman and Archie both have ties to this system. When Holtman went to OSU he had a 5* Senior and other valuable pieces where he didn’t have to create a new culture. He stepped in and ran. Much like Archie would have done there. The culture was what Butler and Xavier had been the last 15 years. They just needed a new voice. We needed a new culture.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Well, that would be the easy way to look at it if you're into excuses.  (Stevens did a lot more than adopt a style; and Matta's last 2 seasons at OSU were NIT and a missed postseason, so it's not as though that was something just "in place and an easy transition.")

When did we hear when Archie was hired it would take a "total rebuild?"   You think that's what he told recruits?  OSU lost 41 PPG off last season's team in just Tate, Williams, and Diop.  And still sit 16-7 and beat Indiana on its home floor a season later.  

Yeah, it's the Brooks thread, so I'll stop; leaving it at "you and I see things a little differently."  I agree on the culture; but with a top 10 recruiting class added to what came back, I think expectations should have been higher than 13-11; especially after a 12-2 start.

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

48 minutes ago, Old Friend said:

As much as I love the toughness/defensive mentality; and was around it through the Knight years; his teams also led the Big Ten in scoring almost every year, despite what his roster looked like.   Indiana can't score in the half court.  We don't even GET good shots much of the time, and it seems kids who make mistake after mistake aren't held accountable; and kids who should be more ready to contribute by now.....aren't.  

If Chris Holtmann didn't have Ohio State at 16-7, I might be more willing to "be patient," but I don't think it's too much to ask for a coach to get his team to compete at a pretty high level in year 2.  I do understand it can take time; but with Morgan, Davis, Durham, and Green....we had 4 returning players who, when new faces were also added, should - in my mind - be better than losing 9 of 10 games, three of them against Nebraska, Rutgers, and Northwestern; plus a very beatable Ohio State team at home.  We win those 4?  We're 17-7 and I don't think anyone's upset.  But lose all of them for myriad reasons, and the natives are rightfully restless. 

Offense doesn't move much; some defensive players are lazy and out of position; and I don't see coaching.  In fact, I see at least one assistant who basically stands with his hands in his pockets.  I think there are problems.  I wish I saw the light at the end of the tunnel and a great direction; but right now, I just don't.  I'm willing to hold off judgement for a couple of seasons, but next season should really begin to show growth, regardless of the roster.  We'll have enough players to compete and win more than we are now.

Mods - can you move this convo to a thread where we can continue this? Apologies for derailing.

I don't think I'm alone here, but I very clearly saw well designed offensive sets and plays coming out of dead ball situations last year. I have not seen any of those this year. Something is very off this year, and I really don't know what it is.

[Old Friend 8,389]

12 minutes ago, Walking Boot of Doom said:

Mods - can you move this convo to a thread where we can continue this? Apologies for derailing.

I don't think I'm alone here, but I very clearly saw well designed offensive sets and plays coming out of dead ball situations last year. I have not seen any of those this year. Something is very off this year, and I really don't know what it is.

Something is off since just before Christmas.  The only simple explanation is that's when Phinisee went down, however I'm not inclined to believe anything is that simple.   But maybe.  

There are hundreds if not thousands of good plays out of BOB/SOB sets and obviously the same or more in dead ball situations.  Called plays are relatively easy if the defense is predictable or you've got the right play called against it or advantages.  Continuity sets and getting consistently good shots against good defense is another.  Adjustments and changes are needed sometimes and putting people in different spots, etc is also something I'd like to see.   As an example, I'd love to see Romeo catch the ball somewhere in the 12-15 foot area more often..he can get downhill faster.  Since he drives to his right so well; perhaps even a stagger screen for him to create either a lane or a mismatch with a post player.   It's that stuff I don't understand.

[mdn82 25,510]

Well, that would be the easy way to look at it if you're into excuses.  (Stevens did a lot more than adopt a style; and Matta's last 2 seasons at OSU were NIT and a missed postseason, so it's not as though that was something just "in place and an easy transition.")
When did we hear when Archie was hired it would take a "total rebuild?"   You think that's what he told recruits?  OSU lost 41 PPG off last season's team in just Tate, Williams, and Diop.  And still sit 16-7 and beat Indiana on its home floor a season later.  
Yeah, it's the Brooks thread, so I'll stop; leaving it at "you and I see things a little differently."  I agree on the culture; but with a top 10 recruiting class added to what came back, I think expectations should have been higher than 13-11; especially after a 12-2 start.

Stevens adopted the style and changed the culture. Excuses? Nah. Look it up for yourself if you don’t believe they coached the same style. Like I said, OSU needed a new voice, and not a change in culture which we need. That’s not to say we shouldn’t be doing better but that wasn’t your original question. So I don’t know what the rest has to do with my answer.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[Old Friend 8,389]

11 minutes ago, mdn82 said:

Stevens adopted the style and changed the culture. Excuses? Nah. Look it up for yourself if you don’t believe they coached the same style. Like I said, OSU needed a new voice, and not a change in culture which we need. That’s not to say we shouldn’t be doing better but that wasn’t your original question. So I don’t know what the rest has to do with my answer.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

Stevens did a whole lot more than adopt what Matta did.  I don't need to look it up.  I watched it for 5 years.   You and I can stop now.    It's just not as simple as saying Holtmann walked into a plug and play. 

And if Indiana needs a new culture, why have I taken as much $hit as I have for suggesting we hire people who came from a successful culture here or recruit kids who understand where they are?   

[Free Jurkin! 1,498]

1 hour ago, Old Friend said:

As much as I love the toughness/defensive mentality; and was around it through the Knight years; his teams also led the Big Ten in scoring almost every year, despite what his roster looked like.   Indiana can't score in the half court.  We don't even GET good shots much of the time, and it seems kids who make mistake after mistake aren't held accountable; and kids who should be more ready to contribute by now.....aren't.  

If Chris Holtmann didn't have Ohio State at 16-7, I might be more willing to "be patient," but I don't think it's too much to ask for a coach to get his team to compete at a pretty high level in year 2.  I do understand it can take time; but with Morgan, Davis, Durham, and Green....we had 4 returning players who, when new faces were also added, should - in my mind - be better than losing 9 of 10 games, three of them against Nebraska, Rutgers, and Northwestern; plus a very beatable Ohio State team at home.  We win those 4?  We're 17-7 and I don't think anyone's upset.  But lose all of them for myriad reasons, and the natives are rightfully restless. 

Offense doesn't move much; some defensive players are lazy and out of position; and I don't see coaching.  In fact, I see at least one assistant who basically stands with his hands in his pockets.  I think there are problems.  I wish I saw the light at the end of the tunnel and a great direction; but right now, I just don't.  I'm willing to hold off judgement for a couple of seasons, but next season should really begin to show growth, regardless of the roster.  We'll have enough players to compete and win more than we are now.

We have open 3s on almost every possession. We just don't have guys who can take them. On ball screens at the 3 point line, Ohio State was going under and not hedging. If you can't make a team pay for playing that kind of defense, then you're just not going to score points, no matter what type of offense you run. I don't think Archie has done a good job with this team, so there's definitely room for improvement, but I don't think the offense is as bad as it looks. Last year, we thought Romeo was a perfect fit because we got a ton of open 3s but didn't have the players to convert them. Unfortunately, we replaced the mediocre shooters from last year with worse shooters this year. 

I think the biggest difference from early in the season is not so much the way IU has been playing, but it's the way other teams are defending. Lanes that were open early in the year that Romeo and Juwan could attack are no longer there because teams know our weakness and are exploiting it. I'm cautiously optimistic that Phinisee and Durham will continue to progress as shooters and that Hunter and Anderson will be able to play real minutes next year. If that happens I think the offense will look much improved

[Old Friend 8,389]

1 minute ago, Free Jurkin! said:

We have open 3s on almost every possession. We just don't have guys who can take them. On ball screens at the 3 point line, Ohio State was going under and not hedging. If you can't make a team pay for playing that kind of defense, then you're just not going to score points, no matter what type of offense you run. I don't think Archie has done a good job with this team, so there's definitely room for improvement, but I don't think the offense is as bad as it looks. Last year, we thought Romeo was a perfect fit because we got a ton of open 3s but didn't have the players to convert them. Unfortunately, we replaced the mediocre shooters from last year with worse shooters this year. 

I think the biggest difference from early in the season is not so much the way IU has been playing, but it's the way other teams are defending. Lanes that were open early in the year that Romeo and Juwan could attack are no longer there because teams know our weakness and are exploiting it. I'm cautiously optimistic that Phinisee and Durham will continue to progress as shooters and that Hunter and Anderson will be able to play real minutes next year. If that happens I think the offense will look much improved

I agree in principle with most of this; but IU scored 96 points against Marquette.   They're capable and that was an anomaly; but 51 points at home against Nebraska?  52 against OSU?  55 against Purdue?  46 against Michigan?  And the worst?   58 against Rutgers.   I think that's a little more than just not making shots.  That's lack of effort, passion, joy, commitment, or some combination.  It's Green and Smith taking more combined shots than Morgan and Langford.   It's kind of square peg, round hole in my opinion.

[mdn82 25,510]

I agree in principle with most of this; but IU scored 96 points against Marquette.   They're capable and that was an anomaly; but 51 points at home against Nebraska?  52 against OSU?  55 against Purdue?  46 against Michigan?  And the worst?   58 against Rutgers.   I think that's a little more than just not making shots.  That's lack of effort, passion, joy, commitment, or some combination.  It's Green and Smith taking more combined shots than Morgan and Langford.   It's kind of square peg, round hole in my opinion.

To me that’s an excuse. We don’t like excuses here.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[mdn82 25,510]

Stevens did a whole lot more than adopt what Matta did.  I don't need to look it up.  I watched it for 5 years.   You and I can stop now.    It's just not as simple as saying Holtmann walked into a plug and play. 
And if Indiana needs a new culture, why have I taken as much $hit as I have for suggesting we hire people who came from a successful culture here or recruit kids who understand where they are?   

Congrats. Many of us watched it. He adapted Matta’s style of play. Improved recruiting while IU was down as did Purdue. Much like every other Butler coach in the last 20 years it was plug and play whether you want to admit that or not.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[HoosierAloha 30,068]

21 minutes ago, Old Friend said:

I agree in principle with most of this; but IU scored 96 points against Marquette.   They're capable and that was an anomaly; but 51 points at home against Nebraska?  52 against OSU?  55 against Purdue?  46 against Michigan?  And the worst?   58 against Rutgers.   I think that's a little more than just not making shots.  That's lack of effort, passion, joy, commitment, or some combination.  It's Green and Smith taking more combined shots than Morgan and Langford.   It's kind of square peg, round hole in my opinion.

I don't think it's just a lack of those mentioned I believe we have chemistry issues.  The trust of a teammate making the right read on offense, covering on help side defense, or making the intelligent play isn't there.  I've never seen an IU team run a fast break so timidly.  I've never seen an IU team (save 13-14) shoot the ball so poorly.  It's an 3am "mixed drink" of bad influences coming together to derail what looked like a promising season.  We need to get old in a hurry but need to do it with more players not on the roster than on the roster. 

Phin went down with a concussion about the same time that Smith's dad was unhappy with how he was being used.  We have players that should be playing their role instead of trying to be "that man", while at the same time having our go to guys not demanding the ball or accountability.  If we're still discussing these issues in two years I will be the first to say Archie failed and he needs to hit the road. 

We had a lot of injuries this season that limited players from practice and learning the system.  That isn't an excuse that we haven't gotten better this season.  The players that weren't injured should have made progress and developed throughout the year.  That hasn't happened and it's concerning.  It's not just a lack of progress but the appearance the team has fractured and looks to be about personal goals over team accomplishments.  That needs to be gone yesterday.