2025-2026 IU Roster

[ebridges24 2,773]

This board would be boring without Wayne and others that share his beliefs. I almost always find Wayne's posts reasonable, even if I don't agree with them all. Keep up the "dirty" work Wayne.

[AH1971 3,432]

1 hour ago, RaceToTheTop said:

Having a different opinion doesn't equal having your head in the sand.

Sure it does, especially when you're purposely being obtuse about it. 

[HoosierHoopster 8,849]

1 hour ago, AH1971 said:

Sure it does, especially when you're purposely being obtuse about it. 

Not that he needs a defender, but I think most here would agree he's not being "obtuse," he just sees the roster and its construction differently. Reasonable minds can disagree.

[WayneFleekHoosier 51,780]

1 hour ago, AH1971 said:

Sure it does, especially when you're purposely being obtuse about it. 

Not being obtuse.  Indiana spent 10. UNC spent 14-15, and Kentucky spent nearly 20.  Indiana spent 6 the year before and probably expected 10 to be incredible. Problem was, teams doubled and tripled down spending 3-5 times market value from the year before.  Thus, it was bad timing for Indiana to need 11-12 from the portal. Indiana probably needed 13-15 to get to top 10 and that would have helped in a year of need.  
 

As far as saving money on returning players.  Sure. Very likely.  But to what impact?  You haven’t provided any real proof on the savings.  The agents are working for their guys to get a market value and negotiate with teams.  Some teams won’t pay new value so those guys leave. Some will.  The home team discount is likely a real thing for some players but again to what extent.  Are we talking 10-20% using those numers it’s a savings of 1-2 million on a budget of 10 million.  That’s not THAT significant when speaking on numbers like that. I believe home school discounts are a thing, but my point is it was not the difference maker in this current roster in my opinion.   It was more imo, that other schools spent record numbers and we did fine but didn’t separate ourselves as much as we were hoping. 

[WayneFleekHoosier 51,780]

2 hours ago, ebridges24 said:

This board would be boring without Wayne and others that share his beliefs. I almost always find Wayne's posts reasonable, even if I don't agree with them all. Keep up the "dirty" work Wayne.

Appreciated.  I’m not always right but I have had good instincts in my lifetime. Did I expect Cig to do what he did at Indiana and predict it?  Hell no.  But once we made a committed monetary investment in winning I expected the results to improve.  Cigs first roster on paper didn’t impress. 
 

So, DeVries can maybe do something similar and out perform expectations.  I think he needs to.  I suspect he might. 
 

I think our talent is way under what I think it needs to be, but ultimately DeVries has a job to figure that out. I also know how important momentum is for a program, so this first year makes me nervous. 

[jermhoosierfan 423]

8 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Not being obtuse.  Indiana spent 10. UNC spent 14-15, and Kentucky spent nearly 20.  Indiana spent 6 the year before and probably expected 10 to be incredible. Problem was, teams doubled and tripled down spending 3-5 times market value from the year before.  Thus, it was bad timing for Indiana to need 11-12 from the portal. Indiana probably needed 13-15 to get to top 10 and that would have helped in a year of need.  
 

As far as saving money on returning players.  Sure. Very likely.  But to what impact?  You haven’t provided any real proof on the savings.  The agents are working for their guys to get a market value and negotiate with teams.  Some teams won’t pay new value so those guys leave. Some will.  The home team discount is likely a real thing for some players but again to what extent.  Are we talking 10-20% using those numers it’s a savings of 1-2 million on a budget of 10 million.  That’s not THAT significant when speaking on numbers like that. I believe home school discounts are a thing, but my point is it was not the difference maker in this current roster in my opinion.   It was more imo, that other schools spent record numbers and we did fine but didn’t separate ourselves as much as we were hoping. 

And you would think that over time, the spending cannot keep going up like it is if there is no ROI for the donors.  I don't know what that breaking point is, but there will have to be one at some point, right?

[WayneFleekHoosier 51,780]

Just now, jermhoosierfan said:

And you would think that over time, the spending cannot keep going up like it is if there is no ROI for the donors.  I don't know what that breaking point is, but there will have to be one at some point, right?

Ask Duke, they’ve been pros at it for years with their LLC. It’s almost like it’s a tax break for the elite at that level. They’ve got something figured out. 

[Pagoda 5,365]

I don’t know about some of those numbers.  I doubt UK is near $20M.  I’d guess the top schools are $12-13M range.  That’s just my estimate, we’re all guessing, maybe I’m wrong.

All we had is $10M this year.  There isn’t any more money, and we sure shouldn’t take any from football.  I think the estimate that lands us as #10-15 in spend is right.  Last year I’m pretty sure we were top-5 behind only Duke and maybe one to two others, but Woody lit that money on fire.  

20% savings from roster continuity on this much roster spend is around $2M, that’s one more big time player or two very good ones.  I think it matters.

Just what’s on my mind.  I don’t know how good or bad this roster is going to be.  At the end of the day, we need CDD to just be a darn good coach who can recruit the right roster get the most from them.  Make the tourney this year, nail ‘26 HS and portal recruiting, top-20 all season long in year 2, and keep building from there… 

[AH1971 3,432]

3 hours ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Not being obtuse.  Indiana spent 10. UNC spent 14-15, and Kentucky spent nearly 20.  Indiana spent 6 the year before and probably expected 10 to be incredible. Problem was, teams doubled and tripled down spending 3-5 times market value from the year before.  Thus, it was bad timing for Indiana to need 11-12 from the portal. Indiana probably needed 13-15 to get to top 10 and that would have helped in a year of need.  
 

As far as saving money on returning players.  Sure. Very likely.  But to what impact?  You haven’t provided any real proof on the savings.  The agents are working for their guys to get a market value and negotiate with teams.  Some teams won’t pay new value so those guys leave. Some will.  The home team discount is likely a real thing for some players but again to what extent.  Are we talking 10-20% using those numers it’s a savings of 1-2 million on a budget of 10 million.  That’s not THAT significant when speaking on numbers like that. I believe home school discounts are a thing, but my point is it was not the difference maker in this current roster in my opinion.   It was more imo, that other schools spent record numbers and we did fine but didn’t separate ourselves as much as we were hoping. 

Of course it’s a real thing. Purdue wouldn’t have been able to field a complete roster had Smith and TKR not taken massive discounts to stay there. And that’s just one example.

You’ve provided names to 3 programs (not substantiated by the way) who allegedly spent more than IU, who are the other ~20 programs that spent more than IU’s $10 million?

[str8baller 7,793]

3 hours ago, HoosierHoopster said:

Not that he needs a defender, but I think most here would agree he's not being "obtuse," he just sees the roster and its construction differently. Reasonable minds can disagree.

Pretty sure everyone sees the same flaws in the roster. It’s just that looking around the college landscape nobody else expects a first year coach with a total overhaul to have a top 10 team no matter what they spend. 
 

If you do…? Fine. But nobody can point to any previous example of why that should be, while other people can point to examples of lower expectations for teams in the same circumstances. 

[str8baller 7,793]

1 minute ago, AH1971 said:

Purdue wouldn’t have been able to field a complete roster had Smith and TKR not taken massive discounts to stay there

Basically this. Of all fans you would think IU fans would get the examples right in front of their face. If you think Purdue paid what Braden Smith or Edey would’ve commanded on the open market I don’t know what to tell you. 
 

Nobody can point to hard facts either way be a the dollars aren’t public. But I’m pretty sure Edey and Smith, both PoY candidates, took sizable discounts to stay home. Similarly, TJD never even tested the waters. He could’ve extracted huge money from places like Duke or UK but it didn’t even get to that point. 
 

Our roster is set and it is surely impacted by having to build it from scratch and do it in about 30 days. If CDD can’t build off this in the future we’ll be looking for a new coach again. Same as the last 25 yrs. 

[AH1971 3,432]

8 minutes ago, str8baller said:

Basically this. Of all fans you would think IU fans would get the examples right in front of their face. If you think Purdue paid what Braden Smith or Edey would’ve commanded on the open market I don’t know what to tell you. 
 

Nobody can point to hard facts either way be a the dollars aren’t public. But I’m pretty sure Edey and Smith, both PoY candidates, took sizable discounts to stay home. Similarly, TJD never even tested the waters. He could’ve extracted huge money from places like Duke or UK but it didn’t even get to that point. 
 

Our roster is set and it is surely impacted by having to build it from scratch and do it in about 30 days. If CDD can’t build off this in the future we’ll be looking for a new coach again. Same as the last 25 yrs. 

I’m guessing Smith is making ~$2 million this year and TKR ~$1.5 million. They also signed one of the top transfer bigs in the portal and had to retain Loyer. I’m guessing those four alone account for close to 80% of Purdue’s entire budget which I would guess is somewhere between $6-7million. Smith and TKR alone would command that much as package deal on the opponent market. 

[WayneFleekHoosier 51,780]

Of course it’s a real thing. Purdue wouldn’t have been able to field a complete roster had Smith and TKR not taken massive discounts to stay there. And that’s just one example. You’ve provided names to 3 programs (not substantiated by the way) who allegedly spent more than IU, who are the other ~20 programs that spent more than IU’s $10 million?

 

Purdue is your example? And with zero facts on actual savings? Purdue is just different and that is the fact. Not too many schools doing what Purdue is doing. They recruit (mostly) winning guys and generally win with the guys they get. By the nature of who they get in the first place, Money isn’t that recruits top priority. That is a factor. Huge factor.

 

Also, UNC been told to have 14. Kentucky by numerous people have been told to have spent upwards of 20.

 

Other top spenders? BYU. Texas Tech. Louisville, UConn Kansas, Duke, Michigan, St. John’s, Arkansas

 

After that? UCLA, Washington, Florida, Arizona, Tennessee, Alabama.

 

Some other sneaky teams-USC, Ohio State, Oregon, Mizzou, Texas, NCState, Maryland, Texas AM, Miami, Kansas St,

 

 

Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

 

[AH1971 3,432]

19 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Purdue is your example? And with zero facts on actual savings? Purdue is just different and that is the fact. Not too many schools doing what Purdue is doing. They recruit (mostly) winning guys and generally win with the guys they get. By the nature of who they get in the first place, Money isn’t that recruits top priority. That is a factor. Huge factor.

 

Also, UNC been told to have 14. Kentucky by numerous people have been told to have spent upwards of 20.

 

Other top spenders? BYU. Texas Tech. Louisville, UConn Kansas, Duke, Michigan, St. John’s, Arkansas

 

After that? UCLA, Washington, Florida, Arizona, Tennessee, Alabama.

 

Some other sneaky teams-USC, Ohio State, Oregon, Mizzou, Texas, NCState, Maryland, Texas AM, Miami, Kansas St,

 

 

Sent from my iPad using BtownBanners mobile app

 

Why wouldn’t Purdue be my example? They’re going to be the preseason #1 team in the country. What about Houston’s NIL spend? You seem to be operating under the premise that every single college basketball player marches into the coaches office at the end of the season, agent by his side, and demands a number or else he’s gone. I don’t believe that is how it works at all. 

Reality is that there are only a handful of players who can demand any number and an overwhelming majority of players are expendable if not outright replaceable. Basically they’re told, this is the number you’re getting, take it or leave it. 
 

At the end of the day, I still believe IU was one of the top spenders this offseason. Maybe not top 3-5, but closer to top 10, worst case top 15. As has been said, you get much more bang for your buck in the portal when you’re supplementing your roster, not building the entire thing from scratch. Unfortunately, IU was in the latter department this offseason.

[Pagoda 5,365]

Programs have to be ballpark for their existing players, but it just stands to reason existing players are less expensive.

First off, some players on a roster are happy and won’t even be looking around.  So at that point it’s not even a competitive market for them.  Less competition means lower price.

For the players on a roster open to moving, it’s going to take a materially higher offer to get them to uproot from a comfortable situation and take a risk somewhere else.  20% or 30% more may not get them to budge.  The current program has an advantage in keeping them.

Unlike the above situation, IU was stuck in the most competitive market for players — the portal.  More competition means higher prices, and unfortunately we needed a whole roster in this high priced market.

Almost every guy we got in the portal this year was contacted by like 30 schools the moment they entered their name.  And there is less relationship building in the short portal time frame.  Another not so great situation was some of our players committed when we had an uncertain roster, which was an even tougher sell that could have increased the price.  It was not an ideal situation.

I don’t know exactly how much is saved with healthy roster continuity and construction, but it’s likely a material amount of money.  

[AH1971 3,432]

10 hours ago, Pagoda said:

I don’t know exactly how much is saved with healthy roster continuity and construction, but it’s likely a material amount of money.  

And this is why IU should materially be in a better spot next year with still one of the larger budgets in the country. Retain 5-6 guys from the previous years roster, bring in 3-4 recruits whose $$ market is different than the portal and then you still have several million to really hone in and supplement your roster with 3-4 impact guys.

[HoosierHoopster 8,849]

15 hours ago, str8baller said:

Pretty sure everyone sees the same flaws in the roster. It’s just that looking around the college landscape nobody else expects a first year coach with a total overhaul to have a top 10 team no matter what they spend. 
 

If you do…? Fine. But nobody can point to any previous example of why that should be, while other people can point to examples of lower expectations for teams in the same circumstances. 

Yeah agree. I am really interested to see if the "flaw" most in focus -- the lack of a rim-protecting big -- will be not as significant as perceived by many, as overcome by a running-shooting, and harassing-type D team that DeVries and current players have indicated we'll see. We have some very good players and players who are taking a step up to B1G-level play. We have some 'pesky' in-your-face type defenders.

Don't know yet how it will all play out, but I am more in the confident-in-DeVries camp than the skeptics camp. End of summer is approaching, the Puerto Rico trip (Aug. 5) and fall are almost here -- can't wait to see how the new look Hoosiers, well, look.

[str8baller 7,793]

37 minutes ago, HoosierHoopster said:

Yeah agree. I am really interested to see if the "flaw" most in focus -- the lack of a rim-protecting big -- will be not as significant as perceived by many, as overcome by a running-shooting, and harassing-type D team that DeVries and current players have indicated we'll see. We have some very good players and players who are taking a step up to B1G-level play. We have some 'pesky' in-your-face type defenders.

Don't know yet how it will all play out, but I am more in the confident-in-DeVries camp than the skeptics camp. End of summer is approaching, the Puerto Rico trip (Aug. 5) and fall are almost here -- can't wait to see how the new look Hoosiers, well, look.

I personally think there’s pretty effective ways to scheme around not having shot blocking. I worry more about depth there vis a vis injuries.  
 

A team like Purdue can sustain an injury at center largely because they play a  more traditional 4 and TKR was able to slide over and soak up a bunch of minutes as their sole post player at times. We have a Tucker/Luke Goode (well not anymore) situation at “4” in a 4-out system. There’s just zero chance those types can slide over and play the 5 in a pinch.  So I do share Wayne’s concern about depth at the 5.  
 

But once Bailey was signed—and he signed early—I’m not sure what you do about. You’re not getting anyone of any quality to come be a 3rd string post player. It seems the backup we got is pretty dang solid. We’re also not going to get a traditional PF as a backup since we would never use one absent an injury, effectively just making them a 3rd string post player.
 

 In an ideal world, I think you have a freshman recruit in that spot that could slide into the backup post role in the event of an injury. But as a first year coach succeeding a guy who didn’t recruit, you’re just kind of stuck. 

[Hoosierfanyuh 7,179]

Rabby says he expects we sign another player btw, more than likely a developmental person/for sure bench piece. 

[ebridges24 2,773]

10 minutes ago, Hoosierfanyuh said:

Rabby says he expects we sign another player btw, more than likely a developmental person/for sure bench piece. 

Who, dammit, who?