Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, Stuhoo said:

Is this like a Jeopardy question?

okay… so my response is:

”Where do you go when you want to marry your first cousin?

I'm sorry, this is incorrect. The correct response is:

"Where do you go when you want to marry your second cousin?"

"Off to Kentucky"...would elicit your response of:

”Where do you go when you want to marry your first cousin?"

Posted
2 minutes ago, Loaded Chicken Sandwich said:

I mean... I'd actually not mind him... But that's just me. Like if we got Knecht, Ware/Shedrick, Battle/Ledlum and Newman... I'd consider that a good haul. He's a guy who can shoot, even if his percentages don't necessarily scream it.

IMO….he’s one guy that Painter misused.  Athletic guard on teams in need of it.  Give him no rope as soon as he missed shots an killed his confidence.

Posted
3 hours ago, ebridges24 said:

Most of what he says strikes me as realistics , i could be wrong, but that's how I see it. I don't like a lot of his posts mainly because he's pointing out bugs in the machine.

If someone were adamant that IU was going to make the Final Four next year would you find that realistic? I think that would be considered to be unbridled and unwarranted optimism and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone that would think that is a realistic opinion. Even an extremely optimistic person would struggle to make that leap with an incomplete roster that is missing almost 1/3 of eventual team. 

Yet, without a single shred of additional evidence, the opinion that IU will definitely be terrible next year is realistic? I could see that being an honest opinion if the team were actually complete and things went as bad as predicted. To consider that a realistic position now though, you have to make some pretty big assumptions based on facts not in evidence. You would pretty much have to assume that IU is A) not going to land players from the portal, B) any portal players IU lands won't be any good, C) no one currently on the team improves significantly, or D) some combination of all of the above. 

With absolutely no insider information, I can confidently say that situation A won't be the case. IU will fill the roster spots or at least most of them with players. They may not all be players that fans love at first sight but the spots will be filled. How likely is it that all or most of those players do not contribute? I'd say pretty unlikely. It is no more reasonable to assume that all of the players we do get will be misses than it is to assume they will be hits. In fact the data is heavily trending toward transfers being more likely contributors than all but the most talented recruits. Nor is C much more likely considering that even under Archie we had players improve during the off season, if only by accident and despite the coaching staff. 

Posted
6 minutes ago, hoosierbgh said:

If someone were adamant that IU was going to make the Final Four next year would you find that realistic? I think that would be considered to be unbridled and unwarranted optimism and you'd be hard pressed to find anyone that would think that is a realistic opinion. Even an extremely optimistic person would struggle to make that leap with an incomplete roster that is missing almost 1/3 of eventual team. 

Yet, without a single shred of additional evidence, the opinion that IU will definitely be terrible next year is realistic? I could see that being an honest opinion if the team were actually complete and things went as bad as predicted. To consider that a realistic position now though, you have to make some pretty big assumptions based on facts not in evidence. You would pretty much have to assume that IU is A) not going to land players from the portal, B) any portal players IU lands won't be any good, C) no one currently on the team improves significantly, or D) some combination of all of the above. 

With absolutely no insider information, I can confidently say that situation A won't be the case. IU will fill the roster spots or at least most of them with players. They may not all be players that fans love at first sight but the spots will be filled. How likely is it that all or most of those players do not contribute? I'd say pretty unlikely. It is no more reasonable to assume that all of the players we do get will be misses than it is to assume they will be hits. In fact the data is heavily trending toward transfers being more likely contributors than all but the most talented recruits. Nor is C much more likely considering that even under Archie we had players improve during the off season, if only by accident and despite the coaching staff. 

You convinced me I was wrong, Wayne, you suck!

Posted

Has WayneFleek said we're definitely going to suck next season?

I see a lot of posts references what we need to compete and questioning whether pieces fit but I don't see him spamming we're going to suck. We had some good pieces this season and didn't really win anything but I don't think the sum was much better than the individual parts. We will suck if we don't get some complimentary pieces to build out a good team next season. I don't see the parts we currently have stepping up as starters on a team that competes to win things next season. I'm not looking for all stars but pieces that lead, compete, and play as a team.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...