Fire Darian DeVries? Lol

[Home Jersey]

10 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

That’s just it.  There’s a smart 28 footer and a not so smart 28 footer.  We tend to take a lot of not so smart 28 footers.  We are successful when we move the ball, make the extra pass, and take a good shot.  Less successful when we chuck and duck.   Last night as the game came down, we didn’t play all that smart.   Could have and should have won that game.  

Don't disagree with you on this and yet we're still in solid position to make the tournament with 8 conference games to go. This is something that can be corrected pretty easily with the right coaching and personnel. We'll see if it's a recurring theme or not based on next year's team. 

[newcastle12]

could be worse, we could have hired Chris ******* Beard and have him running around like a loon shoving players and assistants while he he's ranked in the 50s.

[str8baller]

2 hours ago, MonteMarcaccini said:

Again, walk me thru last night.  I watchedd the replay.  I gave you two instances, one miss and one make.  Every other 3 was within the offense.  Dorn just happened to go 2-12 on a lot of looks generally makes.

But fire the coach! His son took a 28 footer!  Good lord.

What do you want me to walk you through exactly? No offense, but I’m sensing we wouldn’t see eye to eye either way given the comparison you’re trying to force. 
 

But let’s start here, with regards to the two shots you mentioned last night: 

The one by Wilkerson was your classic “heat check” long distance, or otherwise low probability, shot by a player who is playing great and “feeling it.” I personally don’t love those shots because statistically they suck, but I get it. Sometimes a player is on a heater and you let him go. Not a great shot by the numbers but when a guy has half your team’s total points maybe you give him some leash others don’t get. 
 

The Tucker 27 footer was from a player who was 1-9 on the night, 1-8 from 3, from a distance he’s been awful at all year, and quite frankly at this point from a guy who isn’t a great 3 point shooter this season. It came early in the shot clock and in the middle of us trying to make a run. You couldn’t draw up a dumber shot if you tried.   
 

If you want to go back and chart those shots this season by distance to prove they’re good shots, be my guest. I’m all ears. 

[MonteMarcaccini]

1 minute ago, str8baller said:

What do you want me to walk you through exactly? No offense, but I’m sensing we wouldn’t see eye to eye either way given the comparison you’re trying to force. 
 

But let’s start here, with regards to the two shots you mentioned last night: 

The one by Wilkerson was your classic “heat check” long distance, or otherwise low probability, shot by a player who is playing great and “feeling it.” I personally don’t love those shots because statistically they suck, but I get it. Sometimes a player is on a heater and you let him go. Not a great shot by the numbers but when a guy has half your team’s total points maybe you give him some leash others don’t get. 
 

The Tucker 27 footer was from a player who was 1-9 on the night, 1-8 from 3, from a distance he’s been awful at all year, and quite frankly at this point from a guy who isn’t a great 3 point shooter this season. It came early in the shot clock and in the middle of us trying to make a run. You couldn’t draw up a dumber shot if you tried.   
 

If you want to go back and chart those shots this season by distance to prove they’re good shots, be my guest. I’m all ears. 

Not even sure what you are trying to argue here.  The original premise was that if the coach doesn’t change the behavior of his players shooting 28 footers (without any supporting evidence that they do it chronically), then he should be under consideration for firing, after YEAR 1.  It’s nut job posting.

But carry on about the 3% of shots they take during the course of games.  Maybe it deserves a separate thread and we can debate good shot/bad shot each game.

 

[Golfman25]

47 minutes ago, MonteMarcaccini said:

Not even sure what you are trying to argue here.  The original premise was that if the coach doesn’t change the behavior of his players shooting 28 footers (without any supporting evidence that they do it chronically), then he should be under consideration for firing, after YEAR 1.  It’s nut job posting.

But carry on about the 3% of shots they take during the course of games.  Maybe it deserves a separate thread and we can debate good shot/bad shot each game.

 

Yeah, I'm a nut job.  Let's just wait 4 more freaking years.  

And I am not saying CDD isn't the guy or a bad coach.  But I have to see improvement.  Jury is still out, imo.  

[Golfman25]

1 hour ago, Home Jersey said:

Don't disagree with you on this and yet we're still in solid position to make the tournament with 8 conference games to go. This is something that can be corrected pretty easily with the right coaching and personnel. We'll see if it's a recurring theme or not based on next year's team. 

Solid?  You have more faith than I do.  8 games left, with 3 against ranked IL (away), Purdue (away), and MSU (home).  If we lose those three, we need to run the table over everyone else.  Very little room for error, with a team everyone knows is flawed.   A win over USC would have been huge.  

[Uspshoosier]

11 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

Solid? 

5 home games left and they are a projected tourney team as of today and not one that is projected as a last 4 in even with the USC loss.  For me yeah that means they are currently in solid position    If they can’t win home games then they don’t deserve to be in field.  :(

[MonteMarcaccini]

9 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

Yeah, I'm a nut job.  Let's just wait 4 more freaking years.  

And I am not saying CDD isn't the guy or a bad coach.  But I have to see improvement.  Jury is still out, imo.  

“But frankly, if he doesn’t fix it, yes firing should be considered.   It’s part of his job and if he’s not doing his job, there should be consequences. “

This is what you said.  Year 1.  Regarding long 3’s. That is nut job posting.

Keep moving the goal posts if you want.  

[HoosierMatty]

23 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

Yeah, I'm a nut job.  Let's just wait 4 more freaking years.  

And I am not saying CDD isn't the guy or a bad coach.  But I have to see improvement.  Jury is still out, imo.  

Most of us agree the jury is still out. The point of contention is the absurdity of this thread existing, it's practically parody. He hasn't even finished his first season yet. People rag on how insane and toxic our fanbase is. I don't agree with that assessment but this thread 100 percent plays into that stereotype. 

[Golfman25]

11 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

5 home games left and they are a projected tourney team as of today and not one that is projected as a last 4 in even with the USC loss.  For me yeah that means they are currently in solid position    If they can’t win home games then they don’t deserve to be in field.  :(

Yeah, you win some, you lose some. :)  

It's not a "solid" in.  They are on the edge.  They can't afford any more mess-ups.  Sad position to be in.  

[Uspshoosier]

2 minutes ago, Golfman25 said:

They are on the edge

In your opinion.  Which is fine however for me and other bracketologist they are currently not on the edge.  

[Golfman25]

11 minutes ago, MonteMarcaccini said:

 

“But frankly, if he doesn’t fix it, yes firing should be considered.   It’s part of his job and if he’s not doing his job, there should be consequences. “

This is what you said.  Year 1.  Regarding long 3’s. That is nut job posting.

Keep moving the goal posts if you want.  

Not moving the goal posts at all.  Every job comes with a performance evaluation.  If you allow bad basketball, you get bad basketball.  If corrections aren't being made, then why stick with him?  Doing the same thing and expecting different results is the definition of insanity.  We did that with four years of Woodson.  

Is Devrise the guy.  IDK.  He killed it at small time Drake.  He was so/so at bigger time WVU.  To date, he so/so.  There is a chance he's Archie 2.0, just a little taller.  :)  

[Golfman25]

11 minutes ago, HoosierMatty said:

Most of us agree the jury is still out. The point of contention is the absurdity of this thread existing, it's practically parody. He hasn't even finished his first season yet. People rag on how insane and toxic our fanbase is. I don't agree with that assessment but this thread 100 percent plays into that stereotype. 

You know what.  We just watched UCLA and USC (with two "big time coaches") play in freaking empty stadiums.  Pathetic fan bases, both of them.  We may be crazy, but at least we'll show up.    

[Golfman25]

7 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

In your opinion.  Which is fine however for me and other bracketologist they are currently not on the edge.  

How do you figure?  No room for error -- They can't make one mistake.  That is the definition of "the edge."  

[Uspshoosier]

Just now, Golfman25 said:

How do you figure?  No room for error -- They can't make one mistake.  That is the definition of "the edge."  

You say no room for error which I’m guessing you are saying they can’t lose a home game.   As long as that home game is Wisky or Sparty if they lose they still would have a shot whereas you are saying they wouldn’t have a shot.   Ius results don’t happen in a bubble.  Other teams are going to lose games they shouldn’t.

[HoosierHoopster]

1 hour ago, Golfman25 said:

How do you figure?  No room for error -- They can't make one mistake.  That is the definition of "the edge."  

They’re not on the edge right now, realistically they’re solidly in. In all fairness we never really know the committee is sometimes completely idiotic or, uh, internally motivated to pick and not pick certain teams (ahem, UNC last season), but while it will be big for IU to beat Wisconsin (God I still hate them) and Sparty (can’t the little whiner just retire already), neither is a must win.

That said I’ll feel much more comfortable with a W over Wisc. 

[Golfman25]

1 hour ago, Uspshoosier said:

You say no room for error which I’m guessing you are saying they can’t lose a home game.   As long as that home game is Wisky or Sparty if they lose they still would have a shot whereas you are saying they wouldn’t have a shot.   Ius results don’t happen in a bubble.  Other teams are going to lose games they shouldn’t.

Which defines “the edge.”   Solidly in my mind means they have a game or two to mess up and it wouldn’t make a difference.   

[Golfman25]

6 minutes ago, HoosierHoopster said:

They’re not on the edge right now, realistically they’re solidly in. In all fairness we never really know the committee is sometimes completely idiotic or, uh, internally motivated to pick and not pick certain teams (ahem, UNC last season), but while it will be big for IU to beat Wisconsin (God I still hate them) and Sparty (can’t the little whiner just retire already), neither is a must win.

That said I’ll feel much more comfortable with a W over Wisc. 

Again, if it’s based on “the committee,” that’s the edge.  

[HoosierHoopster]

Just now, Golfman25 said:

Again, if it’s based on “the committee,” that’s the edge.  

The “edge”is too cool for the committee. More like the turd.