Rate The 2021-2022 Season! Staff + Players

[mbredenk101 525]

We did win more NCAA tournament games than Kentucky...that has to count for something.

Sent from my SM-F926U1 using BtownBanners mobile app

[reconmkd 4,361]

Well that stung! As I think about it the season ended up about where I expected or hoped. Make the tourney. Probably not the way we all hoped but we did. beat PU or at least look like we can compete with them. 

Staff: B. I have to give them credit for keeping TJD and forcing this team to defend. I think they did fairly well in the limited recruiting time they had. I will reserve comments on the offense for now, as I don’t feel it is fair to judge with the limitations of this roster. Woody wanted a NBA style O with no available shooters. 

Team: C. They definitely overachieved against their limitations. A lot was left to the imagination with the heavy play of the upperclassmen, but curious to see how the younger guys develop. Most of them were definitely not ready to be relied on. Thought Bates would have been further along but he had shown some signs of potential. 
 

I hope Woody can improve, if the defense remains, the new guys can at hit the broad side of a barn, and we any post players,  I think next year could be decent, maybe a first round win? Just got to continue to build upon the foundation! 

[rayl456 493]

36 minutes ago, coonhounds said:

I give it a c almost minus. My goal was to make ncaa tournament. But you have to go back and look at where we were to where we finished. Close games killed us. Lot of Close games are decided early in games with bad rotation and just lack of focus. We need improvement. As a older iu fan I just can't say our conference record is acceptable. We were better than that no matter what anyone on here says and that concerning to me. I also felt we under achieved worse under Archie. We have under achieved alot imo. Coaching been biggest issue but maybe our kids just stink? I don't believe that though

Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk
 

I wouldn't use the word that you chose, but a number of our kids are very average either athletically or in basketball skills and/or basketball IQ.  

[moyemayhem 1,287]

B:

I think given the talent level on this team, we had a pretty low ceiling to begin with and the odds of making the tournament were probably 50/50 at best.  We made it and beat Purdue, so right there we already have vast improvement over the last 5 years.  

As others have said, the offense was ugly.  I think it was mostly due to our lack of shooting and perimeter playmakers, but the sets weren’t creative.  With that said, I think we did a good job of getting Trayce and Race opportunities on the block.  We had issues feeding the post in past regimes, but not this year.

The defense was great.  This team over achieved on that end of the floor, which really says a lot about the coaches.  The body language and team chemistry was night and day compared to last year.

As for next year I really have no sense about how competitive this team will be.  Who will still be around and what we can get in the portal and from the freshmen?  Can Bates and Geronimo develop into difference makers?  I think that’s imperative if we want to be a tournament team.  We really are heading into the unknown, but I think the success of next years team will be pretty telling on whether Woodson will work out here.  If we somehow are a bubble team or better next year, I think there will be reason for hope.

[RaceToTheTop 25,621]

In terms of the guys we brought in not panning out......I basically think the guys we brought in compared to the guys we lost was at the best a wash.

Lost:  Durham, Franklin, Hunter, Brunk

Brought in:  Johnson, Stewart (although he was already here), Kopp, Durr.

I think when you compare the value of those players -- Durham v Johnson, Franklin v Stewart, Hunter v Kopp, Brunk v Durr.....I'm not seeing any kind of separation.  I like X's game but Durham had a strangely effective season despite not shooting it well;  Franklin didn't shoot well but I'd take him over Stewart;  Hunter and Kopp were both bad; Brunk I'd take over Durr because he can at least score a little but it's not either is anything to write home about.  In the end, I think all we did was basically maintain our roster from last year.  And considering that team went 12-15, I'd say 21-14 was a pretty good improvement.

[HoosierAloha 30,068]

Are we grading on a curve? Can we give an incomplete?

Defense - we did some nice things. Trayce given freedom to roam and protect the rim was a net positive but cost us in many situations. We did an excellent job mucking up some games. The over helping that started early in the season and continued was atrocious. I don't know how this was acceptable. We kept saying "well another team won't hit another % close to that" before they would. It cost us the psu game, the Iowa Big 1.o tourney game, and the absolute embarrassment at home to Michigan. (How could they possibly get a better seed than us?!) We could have rebounded a lot better for the size we had but we had a few negative net rebounders in the starting lineup.

Offense - the latter season PnR with X and TJD was looking good for a few games. For the most part, the offense was offensive and looked a lot like Arch offense. Toss it into TJD and watch. It felt like we had players auditioning more than running offense to score. Glad Kopp was able to expand his game. Glad Race was able to get some shots up from deep.

Intangibles - yuck. We need to get way more basketball IQ in the off-season. We need to find a baseline e and e. We need to find leaders. We lacked all of that this season and it showed in many games.

We played a really easy noncon schedule and probably one of the easier Big 1.o schedules. We played a few 'good enough' games in the Big 1.o tourney to go dancing. That's improvement but barely.

I'd probably give an overall C-. We passed but didn't really feel like we did enough homework or preparation to pass the finals. There is a ton of work to get this program back to where it was and should be. Time will tell.

[Golfman25 5,330]

Ok, so here it goes.  

Woodson:  Going with a B+.  He started with zero.  Archie had this team completely psyched out.  When Woodson asked, nobody raised their hand to stay.  From there he built a roster and coached them good enough to end the tournament drought.  But at the end of the day, there where just too many talent holes (never was clear to me how a kid can play basketball for 15 years and not be able to shoot).  He gets points off because I fear he's a bit stubborn.  He says the right things, but some of his actions are rinse and repeat -- substitutions, same starting lineups, lack of creativity on offense to work with the pieces you have, etc.  

Players played up to their ability for the most part, so I'll go with a B+ there as well.  Sure, some had to be motivated a little bit, but they generally responded.  They all seem to generally like playing for Woodson.  I don't see many leaving on purpose -- maybe Lander and Logan, both probably better suited for a different conference.  Some of the older guys may just start their post college lives -- Phinn, Race, Stewart, etc.  The core is Trey, Bates, Geranimo -- each one need to work hard this offseason and expand their game, especially shooting.  The wild cards are X, Kopp and TJD.  TJD probably gone if he stays solidly on the draft projections.  X seems to like it here and likes Woodson.  Kopp, no clue, but he'll need to get his shooting back and be comfortable off the bench.  My guess is we loose six, have the 3 new guys, and hit the portal for 3 more.  I actually think we'll be ok and more suited to what Woodson envisions.  

All in all it was a positive season.  Things are headed in the right direction.  

[Stuhoo 80,506]

 

From 12-15 with a noticeable current of sadness to 21-14 with a notable culture improvement? As brumdog said, it was a fairly similar roster talent-wise. And a flawed roster for sure. No 'hoopers' on the wing was the primary problem. and it was a glaring one. 

• Xavier Johnson's in-season improvement saved our bacon in my opinion. Without that, the last two weeks wouldn't have happened and the mood wouldn't have brightened.
• Having a coaching staff that changed the offensive philosophy 2/3 of the way through was not only necessary, it was good to see.
• I know that we will need an athletic big for next year, but more importantly, for goodness sake, get us some fearless scoring wings!
• If Tamar can gain 10 pounds by November, that's one. We will need at least two more that can get buckets late in the shot clock and hit a shot even against good defense. Banks, Gunn? Doubtful but that'd be an important surprise.

All in all...a nine win improvement with a new coaching staff? Not Tommy Lloyd, but a B+.

Success in the future is by no means guaranteed, but there sure as hell is promise.

 

[Honkyman 1,670]

IU needs reliable shooters by next season plus front court players to replace TJD and Race Thompson assuming they move on as is expected. Next year could be a lot worse than this year's frustratingly up and down season.

[HoosierAloha 30,068]

57 minutes ago, Honkyman said:

IU needs reliable shooters by next season plus front court players to replace TJD and Race Thompson assuming they move on as is expected. Next year could be a lot worse than this year's frustratingly up and down season.

We need to replace the shooters with makers! It's been forever since we've had a lights out maker. When was the last time a maker developed at IU?

[jonz44 810]

Did you just say Woodson was better and at preparation than one of the absolute legends of college basketball? Just asking cause that is the biggest leap of faith ever lofted on this board if that is indeed what you implied lolOK I reread your saying he is like knight but Woodson is better at preparation than in-game adjustments not better at either of the 2 than what is unarguably a top 20 all time coach. Sorry
Sent from my SM-A326U using Tapatalk
 
 
 

I don't want to speak for pumpfake but I don't think they were saying Woodson is better at preparing than Knight was. I think pumpfake was comparing CMW's ability to prepare for a game vs CMW's ability to make in-game adjustments. Pumpfake seems to believe that was BK m/o and MW is in the same mold.

Sent from my SM-G950U using BtownBanners mobile app

[Honkyman 1,670]

Great college shooters were usually great high school shooters. The great shooters have a natural talent for shooting and develop that talent through hard work that begins before they are arrive at college. Coaching at the college level can develop shooting, however. Victor Oladipo was strictly a dunker in high school and became a good shooter at IU.

[Loaded Chicken Sandwich 8,672]

I'm giving everyone a C. That's it. That was the season in a nutshell. Average. 

[OldBuddy67 252]

Shooters, shooters, shooters!!! Period!!!!!!! Was talking with my buddies during the game last night and talking how a Hornsby, Roth, Zeisloft, Coverdale, or Guyton would have helped this team! Team got a lot of open looks from 3 but just couldnt hit them.

As well in terms of next years roster currently with the 3 recruits, we have 16 due to be on scholarship next year. I believe TJD moves on and hope Kopp and Stewart do as well.

Grades: 

Coaching: C+ Losing close games and substitution patterns were maddening. Defense and turnovers much better.

Players: B-Lack of shooting tells the tale.

[HoosierAloha 30,068]

26 minutes ago, Honkyman said:

Great college shooters were usually great high school shooters. The great shooters have a natural talent for shooting and develop that talent through hard work that begins before they are arrive at college. Coaching at the college level can develop shooting, however. Victor Oladipo was strictly a dunker in high school and became a good shooter at IU.

Agree for the most part. I don't know if it takes coaching to develop shooting at the college level. I believe it's more on the player to put in the time and e to become a good shooter.

[Five Prime 1,091]

I'm at the stage of life that I view these players as kids rather than peers.  I would be a very proud parent of any of these guys.  Successful season considering the #1 goal was make the NCAA tourney and end a drought.  

Obviously as a program there is still a looooong way to go.  We need an overall talent upgrade.  There are some pieces but still need several more to complete a puzzle to compete at the top of the Big 10.  I would like to say I'm confident we'll get there but the last 2 decades have left me very skeptical.

[Honkyman 1,670]

Without a legitimate post presence, IU will have a tough time competing even at this season's level next year. Fans will need to be patient and Woodson's recruiting needs to get even better than it has been so far.

[HoosierAloha 30,068]

9 minutes ago, Honkyman said:

Without a legitimate post presence, IU will have a tough time competing even at this season's level next year. Fans will need to be patient and Woodson's recruiting needs to get even better than it has been so far.

The good news is cbb has free agency! We can and should be able to secure a few bigs to round out the roster. Maybe show them what Trayce was doing on/off (NIL) the court to persuade them. Although, we'll need to adjust the offense in a major way to compete for anything above the lower middle of the Big 1.o.

[Class of '66 Old Fart 84,630]

Overall: C     Season met most of our expectations, i.e, finally getting into the Big Dance so just meeting expectations doesn't merit more than a C grade.  Won some key games but lost games we shouldn't have.

Staff: C-      Felt like as the season progressed there should have been a change in our in-game strategies when the same issues kept popping up, i.e, insistence on the same starting 5 regardless, clock management and the hockey line substitution pattern are 3 that stand out to me.            

Players: B    I think they gave us all that they could.  Roster was flawed but that wasn't their collective fault.

Portal Mgt.:  D     X is the only one that gave us much of anything over the course of the season and that's just 25% of what we picked up in the portal.

[HoosierAloha 30,068]

9 minutes ago, Class of '66 Old Fart said:

Overall: C     Season met most of our expectations, i.e, finally getting into the Big Dance so just meeting expectations doesn't merit more than a C grade.  Won some key games but lost games we shouldn't have.

Staff: C-      Felt like as the season progressed there should have been a change in our in-game strategies when the same issues kept popping up, i.e, insistence on the same starting 5 regardless, clock management and the hockey line substitution pattern are 3 that stand out to me.            

Players: B    I think they gave us all that they could.  Roster was flawed but that wasn't their collective fault.

Portal Mgt.:  D     X is the only one that gave us much of anything over the course of the season and that's just 25% of what we picked up in the portal.

Wasn't expecting this grade from you! Good point bringing up the transfer portal too. How would you grade player development?