IUBB vs Iowa - Tuesday, 2/28/23 @ 7:00 on ESPN2

[LIHoosier 25,818]

Is it just me or does it seem like Iowa has been a thorn in our side longer than Wisconsin has?

It's probably cuz we've only played at the Call Center once in the last 3-4 years.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

[bigrod 2,848]

1 hour ago, HoosierFan1994 said:

Last night was bad. It makes things so much more difficult for a team that worked so hard to put themselves in a good spot. Can probably kiss a double bye away and a 3 seed. However, you would have thought it was the 6-25 season when I logged on last night to this site.

Don't get me wrong, I'm mad they blew this opportunity and it's by far the worst loss of the season. Big picture...starting with the home game against Purdue I would have been thrilled with going 5-3 in our last 8 games. 7 of the 8 games IU played a tournament team. Michigan is a bubble team. Now, if they come out flat against Michigan and get bounced in the Big Ten Tournament on Thursday/Friday we have reason to be upset. But this season isn't over. I want to see how these guys respond. IMO they're in a similar position they were in right after the Penn State game. They responded pretty well. 

One last thing..I don't understand the worry yet over next year. It sucks to lose Trayce and probably Jalen. If IU's roster in May has Malik/Trey as our best players, we can worry. However, Mike Woodson isn't dumb. He knows the second this season ends he has to hit the portal. If he doesn't, he deserves to lose his job. I wouldn't be surprised if he has an idea of guys who may want to transfer to IU. Everyone just wait and see what happens. 

That being said, I feel like Woodson has to win at least couple of games in the tournament for this season to feel like it was a success. Indiana has one of the best all-time players with a legit one and done freshman. Not saying Coach Woodson won't be able to field another good team, but when you have that combo you need to do something with it. 

In my opinion it's the way it happened and the time of the year it happened. This team had a lot to play for and could have used the PU game as a surge to finish the season. Instead, it looked like one of the games where no one seemed interested in doing any more than the bare minimum. Everyone TALKED about not letting the Purdue game be a waste and finishing strong, but it turned out to be just talk. Why follow up one of your best games with the worst?

If you're going to advance in a tournament, by definition, you have to be able to handle success. Mental>physical, as some other coach used to say.

[HoosierHoopster 6,795]

13 minutes ago, bigrod said:

In my opinion it's the way it happened and the time of the year it happened. This team had a lot to play for and could have used the PU game as a surge to finish the season. Instead, it looked like one of the games where no one seemed interested in doing any more than the bare minimum. Everyone TALKED about not letting the Purdue game be a waste and finishing strong, but it turned out to be just talk. Why follow up one of your best games with the worst?

If you're going to advance in a tournament, by definition, you have to be able to handle success. Mental>physical, as some other coach used to say.

Agree, they played a BS game as Woodson commented.

However, also agree with HoosierFan1994 on this one. Pathetic showing, but at the end of the day it's one game after we swept PU, and are at least in the market for a 3-4 seed in the tourney. 

I have some issues with the lineups and how they're played, but the team and staff have shown they can play with and defeat the best B1G teams, as well as teams like Xavier. 

The UM game is now a lot bigger -- it's a mindset game, and one we should win. I think we all know Woodson will be laying into the guys heading into that game, and that we should expect to see them come out with a lot more fight, and focus. Think we will.

[Alford Bailey 12,350]

Indy Star had a nice article on Perkins. Not much high major interest til Iowa came in late.

[HoosierFan1994 4,690]

2 hours ago, bigrod said:

In my opinion it's the way it happened and the time of the year it happened. This team had a lot to play for and could have used the PU game as a surge to finish the season. Instead, it looked like one of the games where no one seemed interested in doing any more than the bare minimum. Everyone TALKED about not letting the Purdue game be a waste and finishing strong, but it turned out to be just talk. Why follow up one of your best games with the worst?

If you're going to advance in a tournament, by definition, you have to be able to handle success. Mental>physical, as some other coach used to say.

I 100% understand looking at it from this lens. It was unacceptable. I'm most upset that A) we probably have to play another B1G Tournament game and B) We may not get to play close to home because we fell on the S-Curve because of this loss. However, this team can most certainly rebound. I know they can. 

[HoosierFan1994 4,690]

2 hours ago, HoosierHoopster said:

Agree, they played a BS game as Woodson commented.

However, also agree with HoosierFan1994 on this one. Pathetic showing, but at the end of the day it's one game after we swept PU, and are at least in the market for a 3-4 seed in the tourney. 

I have some issues with the lineups and how they're played, but the team and staff have shown they can play with and defeat the best B1G teams, as well as teams like Xavier. 

The UM game is now a lot bigger -- it's a mindset game, and one we should win. I think we all know Woodson will be laying into the guys heading into that game, and that we should expect to see them come out with a lot more fight, and focus. Think we will.

For the first part that's all I was saying. For sure practice needs to be uncomfortable this week. However, move on and get ready for Michigan and the tournament. Let's say the Hoosiers win Sunday and win a couple of games in the Big Ten Tournament (make it to Saturday/Sunday) I'll be pleased and feel better.

For the second part IU just has no depth outside of Malik. I feel like I pick on him but Bates just gives them nothing at all and he's supposed to be the 6th man. I'm curious as to what his plus/minus is in the last 8 games. 

[Stuhoo 79,639]

32 minutes ago, HoosierFan1994 said:

For the first part that's all I was saying. For sure practice needs to be uncomfortable this week. However, move on and get ready for Michigan and the tournament. Let's say the Hoosiers win Sunday and win a couple of games in the Big Ten Tournament (make it to Saturday/Sunday) I'll be pleased and feel better.

For the second part IU just has no depth outside of Malik. I feel like I pick on him but Bates just gives them nothing at all and he's supposed to be the 6th man. I'm curious as to what his plus/minus is in the last 8 games. 

For March Madness we should have real depth - Malik and whoever doesn't start between Trey Galloway and Xavier Johnson.

• 15-20 minutes per game for Malik; 35 minutes per game for Trayce 25-ish for Race.
• 120 minutes per game between JHS, X,  Miller, and Trey = 30 minutes per player.

 

[Banksyrules 4,517]

Guys some of you know the details of the game better than I but I have question. Why do we over play at the post? Shouldn't we rely on TJD and Race to handle one on one matchups? just feels we over hedge and it just leads to a lot of open threes and that's when it gets nuts. 

[str8baller 5,042]

31 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

Xavier Johnson.

Are we sure he’s coming back? At this point,  I just assume he isn’t or will give us very little if he does. At most he has about ten days to round into shape before the tourney.

[str8baller 5,042]

11 minutes ago, Banksyrules said:

Guys some of you know the details of the game better than I but I have question. Why do we over play at the post? Shouldn't we rely on TJD and Race to handle one on one matchups? just feels we over hedge and it just leads to a lot of open threes and that's when it gets nuts. 

Good question. A lot of our bad defensive possessions happen because of that.   
 

I have no idea what they’re doing, but my best guess is they’re running a defense that only calls for situational doubling of the post and our guys make too many mental errors trying to keep that straight. A couple of games ago a guard was posting up TJD and somebody doubled down leading to a kick out 3. I’m quite sure Woodys scheme didn’t call for that and someone just screwed the pooch. 

[Golfman25 5,002]

14 minutes ago, Banksyrules said:

Guys some of you know the details of the game better than I but I have question. Why do we over play at the post? Shouldn't we rely on TJD and Race to handle one on one matchups? just feels we over hedge and it just leads to a lot of open threes and that's when it gets nuts. 

My own simple minded answer is it's a belief by the older crowd that the 3 pt. shot is ineffective.  Sure it's flashy, but it's the old win by the 3, die by the 3 -- in other words luck had a lot to do with it.  (I saw that mentality in my Kid's high school a few years ago with the old coaches, and boy did we take some beatings)  What coaches need to understand is that the game is changing and today's kids can hit the three very effectively.  So no longer can you rely on luck.  You have to figure out a way to guard the 3, maybe at the expense of giving up a 2.  Just MHO.  

[RaceToTheTop 24,923]

16 minutes ago, str8baller said:

Good question. A lot of our bad defensive possessions happen because of that.   
 

I have no idea what they’re doing, but my best guess is they’re running a defense that only calls for situational doubling of the post and our guys make too many mental errors trying to keep that straight. A couple of games ago a guard was posting up TJD and somebody doubled down leading to a kick out 3. I’m quite sure Woodys scheme didn’t call for that and someone just screwed the pooch. 

Iowa did a good job (or IU did a bad job) on switches last game.  Too often we ended up with a guard on a big down low or TJD was stuck up too against a guard.  Looked like the plan was to switch everything.  Didn’t work.

[str8baller 5,042]

16 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

My own simple minded answer is it's a belief by the older crowd that the 3 pt. shot is ineffective.  Sure it's flashy, but it's the old win by the 3, die by the 3 -- in other words luck had a lot to do with it.  (I saw that mentality in my Kid's high school a few years ago with the old coaches, and boy did we take some beatings)  What coaches need to understand is that the game is changing and today's kids can hit the three very effectively.  So no longer can you rely on luck.  You have to figure out a way to guard the 3, maybe at the expense of giving up a 2.  Just MHO.  

You have to make them to be effective. And a lot of college teams just don’t shoot them at a high enough rate to warrant giving them extra attention on defense. Purdue, for example, is bad at shooting 3’s. 
 

I pulled up Torvick because it has the 3p% easily displayed. The top 5 teams are mediocre to bad at 3pt%. We’re ranked 30th overall and 16th in 3%. Only two teams ranked above us shoot 3’s at a better clip than we do.  
 

In other words, making 3 pointers are not driving these teams’ success.   
 

On the other hand, being bad at guarding the 3 leaves you are the mercy of a hot and/or good shooting team. The majority of the teams in front of us guard the 3 well. The ones that don’t typically have high ranking offenses that can keep pace in a track meet.    
 

But in fairness most of the teams in front of us guard the 2 well, too.
 

So really it’s pretty simple: if you want to be good then play good defense and have a good offense!!! 

[Scotty R 2,127]

19 hours ago, normandale97 said:

There is a reason Iowa wasn’t guarding him tonight. 

Players can develop and get better in the off season. He has shown flashes of being a guy who will be a good player.

Edited March 1, 2023 by Scotty R

[HoosierHoopster 6,795]

2 hours ago, HoosierFan1994 said:

 

For the second part IU just has no depth outside of Malik. I feel like I pick on him but Bates just gives them nothing at all and he's supposed to be the 6th man. I'm curious as to what his plus/minus is in the last 8 games. 

I am pretty sure everyone and their mothers know my feelings at this point on JG and Race (post injury), but JG was (and I assume is) in a boot so that's now irrelevant. Banks is showing reasons to get some time, some think more some think not so much, but Race this time had his time dialed back to 14 minutes, and Banks got 14 as well (5 pts 2 steals). Race is just not the same after his injury, I keep trying to say I'm not trying to bash him, as that's not my intent, but he's hurting the team offensively across several games, and one of my scout friends texted me recently asking what the heck he was doing on the floor. He just isn't playing good. We are thin up front now, but I'm glad Banks is showing some development, and I wish JG was healthy.

Bates is a question mark for sure right now, I don't know what's going on but think it's probably mental. He has shown those 'flashes' in games, he has had some big games this season, but he's really fallen off and especially on the road. It was Woodson touting him coming in from the summer, he's seen the talent level, it's there, it's shown at times, but he's just been way off lately. I hope he figures it out, I'm not on the hope-he-enters-the-portal or he-will-enter-the-portal thing, I can't stand reading that kind of crap. We need production from the bench, for sure. 

[str8baller 5,042]

25 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Iowa did a good job (or IU did a bad job) on switches last game.  Too often we ended up with a guard on a big down low or TJD was stuck up too against a guard.  Looked like the plan was to switch everything.  Didn’t work.

I didn’t think having TJD out on the perimeter guarding really hurt us. He gets down and guards.  And yea…they scored on some mismatches down low, but that isn’t what caused the game to get out of hand. 
 

Similarly, switching seems like a fine strategy against a team like iowa. The problem for us is we have a bunch of guys who have mental lapses on the communication part. To wit…a large part of Iowa’s 3’s were wide open. That’s not scheme so much as execution. It’s probably why Woody was so pissed afterwards. 

[Alford Bailey 12,350]

Watching the replay today and following our guys on defense specifically holy cow we were lost. 
 

I will say all the bounces went against us but we still woulda lost.

[Scotty R 2,127]

8 hours ago, normandale97 said:

This happens when you don’t have good basketball guys on the bench and you have recruiters instead. Woody needs to strengthen the staff in the off-season. Rosemond needs to go immediately. 

I think it was said that Rosemond had the Purdue scout so he did well on that game

 

[Golfman25 5,002]

35 minutes ago, str8baller said:

You have to make them to be effective. And a lot of college teams just don’t shoot them at a high enough rate to warrant giving them extra attention on defense. Purdue, for example, is bad at shooting 3’s. 
 

I pulled up Torvick because it has the 3p% easily displayed. The top 5 teams are mediocre to bad at 3pt%. We’re ranked 30th overall and 16th in 3%. Only two teams ranked above us shoot 3’s at a better clip than we do.  
 

In other words, making 3 pointers are not driving these teams’ success.   
 

On the other hand, being bad at guarding the 3 leaves you are the mercy of a hot and/or good shooting team. The majority of the teams in front of us guard the 3 well. The ones that don’t typically have high ranking offenses that can keep pace in a track meet.    
 

But in fairness most of the teams in front of us guard the 2 well, too.
 

So really it’s pretty simple: if you want to be good then play good defense and have a good offense!!! 

Sure, but define "good" at 3 pt shots.  Then you need to compare to 2 point shots.  33% from three equals 50% from 2.  Looking at the stats, most teams run just over 50% from 2.  So anything above 33% from three has a positive expectancy over 2s.  Iowa's number are 34.7% and 52.3% = which is about equal (and no idea what they are the past few games coming off that MSU beatdown). So you better guard both, which we didn't. 

IU's numbers are 37.8 and 53.2, which actually gives us a 1 pt advantage via the 3.  Yet we want to focus on inside with TJD, which is fine if he passes out for the 3.   

Bottom line, the only way you can leave three points open is if their percentage is below the 2 pt shot equivalent, about 33% vs 50%.  In that case you want them to take 3s, not 2s.  But teams are shooting above that these days, and that is my point.  

[str8baller 5,042]

13 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

IU's numbers are 37.8 and 53.2, which actually gives us a 1 pt advantage via the 3.  Yet we want to focus on inside with TJD, which is fine if he passes out for the 3. 

IU gets open 3’s. Which is why we shoot a high percentage. We get open 3’s cause we force the ball into our nearly unstoppable AA post player who is shooting .574 even through constant double teams. He’d be well over 60% if single covered every game. So we’d have to 1) create a bunch more threes—because we really don’t take very many—without the aid of the post-up, and 2) make them at about a 40% clip to justify not throwing the ball into TJD.    
 

I have seen absolutely nothing from us when TJD is off the floor to suggest that we can create enough high quality 3pt looks w/o his post touches to justify basing our offense off of that instead of his post scoring ability. 
 

Nothing happens in a vacuum and the other teams get to try and alter what you do, as well.