IUBB vs Army - Sunday, 11.12.23 @ 7:00 on BTN

[Uspshoosier 44,671]

14 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

We're shooting 33% as is through 2 games on mostly open or uncontested looks from the perimeter. Efficiency is going to plummet with more volume especially as more shots become contested. We don't have any reliable knock down shooters on the roster currently.

You asked a question and answered it.  Those are guys I have no problem letting it fly.  Personally I don’t care if efficiency or percentage drops.   For me it’s less efficient clogging up the lane and throwing into the post play after play after play especially when there isn’t a top 10 playing in school history you’re throwing it down to.   For me I don’t need the shooter to be a  “knock down” shooter  to shoot volume 3s.   

[IndyResident16 567]

9 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

You asked a question and answered it.  Those are guys I have no problem letting it fly.  Personally I don’t care if efficiency or percentage drops.   For me it’s less efficient clogging up the lane and throwing into the post play after play after play especially when there isn’t a top 10 playing in school history you’re throwing it down to.   For me I don’t need the shooter to “knock down” to shoot volume 3s.   

I know you don't care but the coaching staff does and it's precisely why IU doesn't jack a bunch of 3's; because they don't have the personnel to do it. Indiana needing ~35 three point attempts just to hit 9-10 a game is going to have us playing on Wednesday of the B10 Tournament and nowhere near as efficient as "clogging up the lane and throwing into the post play after play"...clearly you have no idea what efficiency means or how it works. I'm much more fixated on limiting turnovers and on the defensive side of the ball than simply attempting more three pointers.

IU shot ~60% from the field Sunday night and over 80% from the line on 20+ attempts yet only won by 8. Why? Because of turnovers. Cut the turnovers in half and that's roughly 10 extra possessions. 10 extra possessions scoring at a 60% clip is at minimum 12 extra points. That's the difference between a sweat it out type game and a 20 point blowout. Much better chance of this team solving the their turnover issues than become a reliable 3 point shooting team. 

Edited November 14, 2023 by IndyResident16

[Uspshoosier 44,671]

Until they figure out a way to defend the 3 within the defensive scheme it isn’t going to matter how many 3s IU takes or doesn’t take.     Copy cat leagues.   Coaches for the most part know what they are doing so I’m guessing teams watched tape on both  Penn St games and Miami from last year  and watched them carve up this defense.  
 

 

[Uspshoosier 44,671]

Just now, IndyResident16 said:

I know you don't care but the coaching staff does and it's precisely why IU doesn't jack a bunch of 3's; because they don't have the personnel to do it. Indiana needing ~35 three point attempts just to hit 9-10 a game is going to have us playing on Wednesday of the B10 Tournament and nowhere as efficient as "clogging up the lane and throwing into the post play after play"...clearly you have no idea what efficiency means or how it works. I'm much more fixated on limiting turnovers and on the defensive side of the ball than simply attempting more three pointers.

IU shot ~60% from the field Sunday night and over 80% from the line on 20+ attempts yet only won by 8. Why? Because of turnovers. Cut the turnovers in half and that's roughly 10 extra possessions. 10 extra possessions scoring at a 60% clip is at minimum 12 extra points. That's the difference between a sweat it out type game and a 20 point blowout. Much better chance of this team solving the their turnover issues than become a reliable 3 point shooting team. 

They won because they played Army and not a team with a pulse 

[Dave from Dayton 2,786]

14 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

You asked a question and answered it.  Those are guys I have no problem letting it fly.  Personally I don’t care if efficiency or percentage drops.   For me it’s less efficient clogging up the lane and throwing into the post play after play after play especially when there isn’t a top 10 playing in school history you’re throwing it down to.   For me I don’t need the shooter to be a “knock down” shooter to shoot volume 3s.   

I have mixed thoughts about volume 3s being attempted.  This assumes we have a volume of possessions and can afford, maybe, to miss a large percentage...thereby making offensive rebounding that much more important.  How are we doing on offensive rebounding?  Never mind.

How are we doing on turnovers?  Never mind.

I also do not necessarily believe that more shots from the 3 line ends up automatically reducing the efficiency of making shots.  Especially if passing improves and plays set up the outside shooters.  

Plus, if shooting from the outside isn't getting more points and giving the ball to the opponent, then the more efficient strategy is to go inside or spot up or assist more.  

Defense, too, comes into the mix.

It is complicated.  Not really a good idea to just point out one variable as a fix.

 

[Uspshoosier 44,671]

5 minutes ago, IndyResident16 said:

clearly you have no idea what efficiency means or how it works.

I do and I still think they need to let it fly.   It’s ok to have a different opinion or perspective.   Just because you don’t agree with someone doesn’t automatically mean that they clearly don’t have an idea how it works.    

[Stuhoo 77,881]

Last year we had six of our ten players (once X got hurt) who either refused to take a three or, even when open, were terrible from beyond the arc:

• Trayce
• Race
• Malik
• Jordan G
• Gunn
• Banks

JHS, Kopp, Bates, and Gallo were either respectable or better from three last year.

---------------------------------------------------------

This year? I would say that eight of our ten projected rotation players; 

• Mgbako
• X,
• Gallo,
• Cupps,
• Ware,
• Malik,
• Banks,
• and maaaaybe Gunn,

are (subjectively) respectable or better from three. That should be an improvement and because of that we should have more volume.

Put Malik and (when he's in the game) Sparks in the post, have Ware set high screens and pop, and let the 'out' bigs like Ware, Banks, Mgbako and Walker rim run or pop, and chase long misses.

[IndyResident16 567]

10 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

I do and I still think they need to let it fly.   It’s ok to have a different opinion or perspective.   Just because you don’t agree with someone doesn’t automatically mean that they clearly don’t have an idea how it works.    

IU is clearly at it's best with guys like Ware and Reneau scoring at the rim. Giving that up to brick 25 three pointers a game at the expense of making 8 or 9 (instead of 5 or 6) is literally how efficiency works lol, there's no differing opinion. I would love for IU to be able to make 9 or 10 three's a game but realize that it isn't practical to do it efficiently given our personnel.

[Uspshoosier 44,671]

6 minutes ago, Ngw7183 said:

he was already getting beat off the dribble vs army.

So was every other guard.   Hummel specifically called out Johnson for them blowing right by him

[Uspshoosier 44,671]

1 minute ago, IndyResident16 said:

IU is clearly at its best with guys like Ware and Reneau scoring at the rim. Giving that up to brick 25 three pointers a game at the expense of making 8 or 9 (instead of 5 or 6) is literally how efficiency works lol, there's no differing opinion. I would love for IU to be able to make 9 or 10 three's a game but realize that it isn't practical to do it efficiently given our personnel.

Clearly at its best 2 games in against FGCU and Army.   For me I’m fine with it because there is more at stake here then being more efficient in year 3.   If you don’t think IU is getting negative recruited as we speak with some of these wings and guards that would help IU be more efficient from 3 then I can’t help you.   Someone is in Harrelson and Peterson ear as we speak saying look at IU just throwing it in to a big man and letting him work.    Why on earth would you risk going there where they only shoot 13 threes a game.   Mgbako not get many opportunities from 3.   IU is having a hard time getting wings and guards to comit anyway don’t need to give teams easy fire power just because they are worried about but the most efficient.     Agree to disagree and we can move on or at least I already have 

[IndyResident16 567]

2 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Clearly at its best 2 games in against FGCU and Army.   For me I’m fine with it because there is more at stake here then being more efficient in year 3.   If you don’t think IU is getting negative recruited as we speak with some of these wings and guards that would help IU be more efficient from 3 then I can’t help you.   Someone is in Harrelson and Peterson ear as we speak saying look at IU just throwing it in to a big man and letting him work.    Why on earth would you risk going there where they only shoot 13 threes a game.   Mgbako not get many opportunities from 3.   IU is having a hard time getting wings and guards to comit anyway don’t need to give teams easy fire power just because they are worried about but the most efficient.     Agree to disagree and we can move on or at least I already have 

We just signed one of the top high school 3 point shooters in the country.....not sure what you're talking about. 

[J34 1,428]

42 minutes ago, Ngw7183 said:

20 years ago. The game is little different. 

Completely irrelevant! 

Now, if he was a 4 or 5, sure the game has changed for them. The pg position hasn't changed much in twenty years.

[IUFAN1976 2,646]

13 hours ago, Hoosier987 said:

 Seasons can be won or lost before any games begin during the summer. Woodson constructed this team. It was clear to anyone who watched IU Basketball that we lacked guard play and scoring ability…yet he didn’t address these issues during the off-season and it’s rearing it’s ugly head. This is his 3rd year, he needs to continue an upward trajectory but he left himself a mighty tall task with the makeup of this team….and I won’t mince my words, last nights coaching wasn’t very good. This team lacks basic teaching fundamentals. 

And I think Woodson is the type of coach that relies heavily on leadership and his players teaching them the core stuff but I question if he’s got the right player or players in a leadership role.  Those two have never been in that role before.  I think TG could be OK but I really question X, the dude was whining to the refs a lot and he threw his teammates under the bus on tv after the game.

[Stuhoo 77,881]

2 minutes ago, IUFAN1976 said:

I think TG could be OK but I really question X, the dude was whining to the refs a lot and he threw his teammates under the bus on tv after the game.

From what I can discern I think you've got it backwards.

Not that Gallo is a problem (not at all), but X is thought to be a more natural, vocal leader.

Certainly so are Walker and Cupps, but their roles/age/newness to the program limit them.

[J34 1,428]

31 minutes ago, Ngw7183 said:

Didn’t say every white kid was. What I do know is when we have a white kid who plays hard this fanbase likes to act like he is IsiahThomas.

he was already getting beat off the dribble vs army. It will show up more and more. Love the kid, compared my own kid to him and the way he plays, fans acting like him playing more, taking X minutes, etc is needed - is a failed proposition. 

yes, CJ is longer, quicker, more bounce etc. he has traits needed to be a better defender and what we need against better teams. We have to get him on track. 
 

My opinion, nothing more - best lineup if everything was working right - X, CJ, Trey, MM then Ware. Cupps, Malik, Banks - 8 men most games. That is what we need to build to. Best defensive and offensive potential 

Every time we get a 6'6 athletic kid, some people think he's the next Calbert Cheaney.(see how that works)

What have you seen from CJ, that merits more playing time, let alone starting?

[IUFAN1976 2,646]

13 hours ago, Ngw7183 said:

Look, we can disagree. He should lead our team in assists because he has the ball all the time. He refuses to pass more than he does. He could and should have double that number. Seen many other intelligent posters on Twitter and other boards who feel exact same. This isn’t some crazy notion. Stats are not end all. 

if Ware is supposed to space it (doubt that is direction) but when he goes to the post, which is often, Malik is clogging it up. 

also, he is big part of the reason we can’t get out and run. MM would change that and space the floor more. 

not saying we go small ball all the time nor do I think it would work with our roster. I am saying MM needs to be rotated into there more than now which has been zero minutes there.

He very well want to be a 3 but at some point, he will need to realize he is a 4 and excellent one at that. 

I was texting a friend during the Army game and I made a comment to my friend that Reneau is a black hole, I was really surprised he had that many assists.  I noticed that once he gets the ball, it takes him way too much time to make a move, seems indecisive on which way he is feeling the defender then a double team comes and that is where he finally passes it.  He needs to move much quicker, pass it much quicker, etc.  I think he looks to score first and that only helps the defense predict his move.  Maybe he should be a facilitator first and that would open up things more for everyone.  He don’t have to have that shoot first mentality.  Last thing, I have noticed he missed MM and Ware a lot cutting, it’s like he really don’t want to pass to them or he’s got really poor recognition 

[go iu bb 5,309]

39 minutes ago, Ngw7183 said:

Didn’t say every white kid was. What I do know is when we have a white kid who plays hard this fanbase likes to act like he is IsiahThomas.

 

Hyperbole much?

I don't see anyone saying that Cupps is the next coming of Isiah. Nor have I seen that for any other white kid. It's also kind of weird thing to say since Isiah is black. 

Please show me where anyone is comparing him to one of the best Hoosiers ever and an NBA Hall of Famer?

[Uspshoosier 44,671]

1 minute ago, Ngw7183 said:

X was being lazy, we know he can. So you are saying Cupps was being lazy? Doubt it. He can’t stay in front of quicker guys. 

Doesn’t really matter which was lazy they both got beat.   Doesn’t matter if you know he can he still got beat 

[IUFAN1976 2,646]

13 minutes ago, Stuhoo said:

From what I can discern I think you've got it backwards.

Not that Gallo is a problem (not at all), but X is thought to be a more natural, vocal leader.

Certainly so are Walker and Cupps, but their roles/age/newness to the program limit them.

It takes more than just being vocal to be a natural leader.  You have to walk the walk and talk the talk. Leading by example is a huge part and arguing every call against you isn’t leading by example and rolling your teammates under the bus on tv isn’t cool either.  It should be said, but only in the locker room and straight to their face, not to a tv audience 

[Stuhoo 77,881]

6 minutes ago, IUFAN1976 said:

It takes more than just being vocal to be a natural leader.  You have to walk the walk and talk the talk. Leading by example is a huge part and arguing every call against you isn’t leading by example and rolling your teammates under the bus on tv isn’t cool either.  It should be said, but only in the locker room and straight to their face, not to a tv audience 

As go iu bb said above ... "hyperbole much?"

And FWIW, no one said that X is a flawless leader, just that he is a more natural leader than Galloway.