Indiana vs. Harvard- Sunday 11/26 @ 4:30 PM on BTN

[choosierred1 113]

I would rather we play without X. Offense flows better. And, he is always saying, "My bad." There should be no more, "my bads."

Sent from my SM-S916U1 using Tapatalk

[IU_FanClub 1,771]

1 hour ago, choosierred1 said:

I would rather we play without X. Offense flows better. And, he is always saying, "My bad." There should be no more, "my bads."

Sent from my SM-S916U1 using Tapatalk
 

This just crazy talk. What guard do we have better than X???

[choosierred1 113]

This just crazy talk. What guard do we have better than X???

He is a very good player and all, but I've played with players similar to him. He tries to do everything. He's the big dog. But, he tries to do too much and be involved in everything that it just doesn't work. I like XJ. Just would rather he more of a role player. Offense runs better without him.

Sent from my SM-S916U1 using Tapatalk

[Home Jersey 12,254]

49 minutes ago, choosierred1 said:

He is a very good player and all, but I've played with players similar to him. He tries to do everything. He's the big dog. But, he tries to do too much and be involved in everything that it just doesn't work. I like XJ. Just would rather he more of a role player. Offense runs better without him.
Sent from my SM-S916U1 using Tapatalk
 

XJ is one of the most polarizing IU basketball players I've seen in my time as a fan - people either love him or hate him for the most part. 

It's already been discussed ad nauseam I'm sure and most people's minds won't be changed. Like most things though, it's not all black and white. People typically see their own set of pros/cons about him and value his skillsets in a widely varied way (ex: a lot of people say something along the lines of "we're better off without him" or start Cupps over XJ after the first game, or that he's not a natural leader, etc, etc... which is not what I take your post to say). 

I think you hit the nail on the head with "he tries to do everything." He'd probably be a lot more effective in a situation where he can play a more focused role (ie scorer, distributor, etc). I think he could play a few different supporting roles well - just not the "do it all" lead guard/star of the backcourt. He is being asked to do too much. Problem is, Trey/Cupps/Gunn are not ready/able to pick up a lot of the slack, so we have to ask X to do too much.

Sometimes he is out of control, sometimes his reactions rub people the wrong way (myself included every now and then). A little disappointing from a sixth year player, but you can't expect total perfection from any individual player. We have no other options to go to. 

It's pretty jarringly apparent how badly we needed to use that last scholly on a guard - any guard really - it was obvious on paper and it looks even worse on the court. Newton's injury doesn't help. Gunn's lagging development doesn't help. I mean, FDU beat purdewww with a squad of D2 guards. Nobody worth a lick in the spring wanted to wear the candy stripes? Find that hard to believe. 

I read that to mean, staff thought we'd be getting more out of Trey/Gunn/Cupps and/or that Newton would be a go this year. There was no reason not to use the scholarship, even if just on someone that you thought could just be a serviceable back up in case of injury. Yes they swung and missed on big name players (Knecht, Dingle, etc.)

I don't mean to beat up the staff about it but I hope they learn from the calculated risk they took and seemingly misfired on. It's a long season though - by Feb/March, could their gamble pay off? That's definitely one storyline for this season, IMO. I hope it works out for them. If it doesn't, we'll really need a huge recruiting hall in the Spring to keep a swath of the fanbase happy with the direction of travel. 

We shall see, It's a long year! 5-1, won every game we "should" so far. Next few will be huge. 

LETS GO HOOSIERS!!!!

[Home Jersey 12,254]

22 hours ago, RaceToTheTop said:

1.  Didn't think I'd see Banks look to shoot the three so much. 

2.  Mack is a really nice player for Harvard.  

3.  Don't know how much anyone picked up on it, but there was a two possession span in the second half where Woody brought Galloway to the bench and Cupps was playing the point and Mgbako played the 2 guard.

4.  Can't believe that Altman couldn't get anything out of Ware.  If there is any better advertisement to a big looking to go to IU (looking at you, DQ) it's been the play of Ware and Reneau.

5.  That's two excellent games in a row for Walker.  So far he's deserved more minutes than Sparks.

6.  Hopefully X is okay.....really need him.  Good to get Cupps some quality minutes playing against a very good guard, though.  

7.  During this last sentence, refs reviewed and took another three away from us.

This is a GREAT point Race. We had Banks at the 3. 

XJ/Cupps/Trey, Mack, Banks, Reneau, Ware ... could be a lineup worth seeing more minutes of

[JSHoosier 21,595]

3 hours ago, IU_FanClub said:

This just crazy talk. What guard do we have better than X???

He can be very good. At the same time negatives have a tendency to snow ball and oh boy can he be horrendous when they do.

[RaceToTheTop 28,505]

Was good to  see the second half perimeter defense after playing so horribly in the first half.

FWIW, for the year, the Hoosiers are giving up 45% shooting from inside the arc and 35% outside.  Those numbers are livable -- you'd like to see below 35% from outside the arc, but 45% inside is decent -- the problem is the number of three point shots we're giving up.  You can give up 35% if you are allowing an average number of threes.  Opponents are shooting 27 1/2 three pointers/game.  Basically giving up 9.5 threes on 27.5 attempts.

[HoosierHoopster 7,661]

23 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Was good to  see the second half perimeter defense after playing so horribly in the first half.

FWIW, for the year, the Hoosiers are giving up 45% shooting from inside the arc and 35% outside.  Those numbers are livable -- you'd like to see below 35% from outside the arc, but 45% inside is decent -- the problem is the number of three point shots we're giving up.  You can give up 35% if you are allowing an average number of threes.  Opponents are shooting 27 1/2 three pointers/game.  Basically giving up 9.5 threes on 27.5 attempts.

Right bc the scouting reports say we can’t defend the 3 well. They’ll keep jacking them up against us at a high clip until we build a consistent perimeter D

[RaceToTheTop 28,505]

Just now, HoosierHoopster said:

Right bc the scouting reports say we can’t defend the 3 well. They’ll keep jacking them up against us at a high clip until we build a consistent perimeter D

Oh, I agree.  That should be the way teams should attack IU.

[str8baller 6,417]

10 hours ago, HoosierHoopster said:

Right bc the scouting reports say we can’t defend the 3 well. They’ll keep jacking them up against us at a high clip until we build a consistent perimeter D

There will be some teams that don’t shoot great from 3 and won’t deviate from what they do and play right into our hands. There will be others that love shooting 3’s whom we should be better than who beat us by just making open jumpers.  
 

I don’t have a lot of faith in us getting a consistent perimeter D this year when we couldn’t last year and we had a better defensive squad that was more veteran. 

[Home Jersey 12,254]