How is Darian DeVries Doing So Far?

[Pagoda]

2 hours ago, Asha’man said:

Saw someone on another board claiming we will be around 12.5 million for next year. 

I find that to be encouraging.  If true, a ~25% increase over this season.

1 hour ago, Stuhoo said:

I’m assuming that three players came at somewhat of a discount; Tucker, Enright, and Sisley. That’s a challenge because when it’s not an entirely new roster like we built , it’s easier to get discounts. More importantly, with more returnees on the roster the staff has full knowledge about which players are worth “market price” to keep.

I get your logic on Tucker.  The chatter I heard is he got paid like the top-20 portal player he was, and it sounded like he got a lot.  Something like $2.5M+, I'm not sure on the exact number.

But, that just further supports how expensive it was to build a whole new roster from scratch.  

I'm still more in the camp our primary issues is not money, but spending it.  Hopefully with our whole staff in place and a small core of a team, we do better in the portal this year.  As @Asha’man noted with that Duke guard, in reality the portal has already started with agents beginning to shop their clients.  We should be much more a part of this process than we were last year.  Fingers crossed.

[Jeff Flabjohns]

Tucker is competing out there, no doubt. Just more limited than ever.

Thankfully it’s his last year.
Not like he would have transferred out and we’d be stuck paying him above-market again. Coach sees his son’s limitations this year up close.

Frees up a ton of cash. 

[WayneFleekHoosier]

1 hour ago, Jeff Flabjohns said:

I think WFH was saying we are spending somewhere between the 10-25th highest on NIL, most likely 15-20th. Not 25 mil

Agree on Tucker.

Yes.  Exactly.  It was 10-11 million by most reports. Lamar was near 2.5.  Bailey was near 1.5.  Maybe Tuck was near 2, I’m not sure on him. 750 for Conerway.  On and on. About 10-11 total. Which puts us around 10-25 most in the country. Which should be a relative scale to where expectations can fairly lie. I think we got outspent by a lot of teams that we didn’t expect to pony up. I think we thought 10 million would put us around 10th but in reality we ended up closer to 20th. 
 

We should have built a top 25 roster.  That’s the goal when you spend that level of money. Otherwise it’s a relative failure. Then getting results is the next step.  Get more out of less or less out of more is the big coaching evaluation. Jury is out on DeVries both on roster building and team improvement. 

[BGleas]

13 minutes ago, WayneFleekHoosier said:

Yes.  Exactly.  It was 10-11 million by most reports. Lamar was near 2.5.  Bailey was near 1.5.  Maybe Tuck was near 2, I’m not sure on him. 750 for Conerway.  On and on. About 10-11 total. Which puts us around 10-25 most in the country. Which should be a relative scale to where expectations can fairly lie. I think we got outspent by a lot of teams that we didn’t expect to pony up. I think we thought 10 million would put us around 10th but in reality we ended up closer to 20th. 
 

We should have built a top 25 roster.  That’s the goal when you spend that level of money. Otherwise it’s a relative failure. Then getting results is the next step.  Get more out of less or less out of more is the big coaching evaluation. Jury is out on DeVries both on roster building and team improvement. 

It's an interesting thing. In terms of basketball coaching, I think he's gotten more out of less. Not a great deal more, but IMO more out of less. That's meaning what he's done with this roster. 

In terms of the building of the roster and the money spent, we did not get the bang for our buck. Spending $10-$11M should have gotten us a legit power 5 big and point guard. 

That's why my big concern remains recruiting, not the actual coaching. 

[Unexpectedflash]

6 minutes ago, BGleas said:

It's an interesting thing. In terms of basketball coaching, I think he's gotten more out of less. Not a great deal more, but IMO more out of less. That's meaning what he's done with this roster. 

In terms of the building of the roster and the money spent, we did not get the bang for our buck. Spending $10-$11M should have gotten us a legit power 5 big and point guard. 

That's what why big concern remains recruiting, not the actual coaching. 

If it means anything his WVU team last year was way more talented. I doubt Devries forgot how to evaluate in a year so I have to hope it’ll be better with a full offseason but ya this roster isn’t great outside of Lamar 

[BA47591]

Head coaches don't build rosters. Assistants do. They have national and now international connections that bubble up names and they go see see them. The come up with a dozen or so names in each class starting when they're incoming freshmen. They start working them it depends on the culture of whomever they're working for on who the put the most time into. DD hadn't been working players for damn near a decade and he thought he had Murphy and Moikobu coming in to build a roster for him that reflected their prowess. Rod Clark was prayer answered but too late to do anything about the 26' team. Kenny and Drew have temp contracts. 2 years each. I have to believe it's because they're were emergency filler and will be replaced. 

Geoff Alexander and Chin Coleman would immediately change our talent level. Along with Rod Clark, that's a serious staff. 

All of this will come down to money though. I believe in DD more now than i did when we hired him. He can coach an offense that can hang a banner. He needs talent acquisition specialists. 

 

[Stuhoo]

It’s so much more cost-effective to have six potential returnees, all of whom will come fairly cheaply, and all of whom our staff has a clear sense of their value and whether they can contribute at the relatively low price they command.

Add our three incoming freshman to that mix, and we have nine slots where the staff already knows their value relative to budget.

Whereas for the year we’re currently in, the staff only knew value relative to budget for two guys, Enright and Tucker. Of those two, one of them has underperformed (Tucker) and one has over performed relative to their budgetary expectations.

It’s a huge advantage when trying to build a roster that will outperform expenditures to already have a sense of as many as nine of your 13 slots for next year.

[str8baller]

48 minutes ago, BA47591 said:

and now international connections

Whomever that connection is needs fired. I can think of a half dozen teams in our strata that got quality starters out of Europe. We paid for two developmental players, one of which is redshirting. That’s absurd. Europe is basically a developmental ground at this point and there’s no point in paying a player to come over if they can’t contribute. Hell, Purdue is a second teir development program and their Euro was dropping buckets on our head last night.  
 

An easy staff upgrade in the offseason is firing whomever brought in the two Euros and getting a real scout there. 

[RoadRage]

I don’t think DeVries is a great coach. I don’t think he will ever be a great coach, great coaches are rare in my opinion. You either have to get lucky to get one, or be willing to overpay and then it is no sure thing because you still have to get players that fit and stay healthy. Eventually, Indiana is just going to have to pick a guy and stick with him, the longer a guy is here the better connections he makes and the greater the chances he can land the top recruits he needs to be successful. Whether DeVries is the guy to stick with, I don’t know, but you can’t just keep changing coaches every 4 or 5 years and expect to build a successful program.

[Asha’man]

2 hours ago, Jeff Flabjohns said:

I’d wager Tuck didn’t come at a discount. Him following DDv was a part of the hiring pitch. Not a huge part, but not insignificant. At the time that seemed great. Devries family has been paid handsomely this year. 

I’m guessing he received fair market value for what was supposed to be an all-conference player. Shame the ROI hasn’t been great. 
 

I think both probably thought he would be better and didn’t realize the athletic/physicality of the big ten would be what it is. Dusty May said after last season the one thing he totally underestimated was how physical the conference is. So he adjusted and now is the favorite to win it all. Let’s hope DeVries adjusts after some lessons learned this year. In the meantime I expect to see IU called on selection Sunday and enjoy this team for what it is. 

[Uspshoosier]

17 minutes ago, str8baller said:

We paid for two developmental players, one of which is redshirting. That’s absurd

From what has been reported about that the staff had their top 11 and then they took fliers on 2 developmental players from over seas that didn’t cost anything (less the mid major players) both parties new what the situation was.   

[WayneFleekHoosier]

1 hour ago, Stuhoo said:

It’s so much more cost-effective to have six potential returnees, all of whom will come fairly cheaply, and all of whom our staff has a clear sense of their value and whether they can contribute at the relatively low price they command.

Add our three incoming freshman to that mix, and we have nine slots where the staff already knows their value relative to budget.

Whereas for the year we’re currently in, the staff only knew value relative to budget for two guys, Enright and Tucker. Of those two, one of them has underperformed (Tucker) and one has over performed relative to their budgetary expectations.

It’s a huge advantage when trying to build a roster that will outperform expenditures to already have a sense of as many as nine of your 13 slots for next year.

I suppose. The 3 freshman help. The rest cost what they are worth.  And they aren’t worth much.  
Sisley and Dorn might be bargains.  Idk.  But in general the roster needs such massive upgrades, we need space for them.  #ballingonabudget

[str8baller]

1 hour ago, RoadRage said:

I don’t think DeVries is a great coach. I don’t think he will ever be a great coach, great coaches are rare in my opinion. You either have to get lucky to get one, or be willing to overpay and then it is no sure thing because you still have to get players that fit and stay healthy. Eventually, Indiana is just going to have to pick a guy and stick with him, the longer a guy is here the better connections he makes and the greater the chances he can land the top recruits he needs to be successful. Whether DeVries is the guy to stick with, I don’t know, but you can’t just keep changing coaches every 4 or 5 years and expect to build a successful program.

I sort of agree. Depends on your definition of “great coach.” My test case is Jim Boheim and if you think he’s a great coach. I don’t. Good but not great. 
 

He coached 40 years and won one title. It took him 26yrs. If IU hires a Jim Boheim they’ll win another title…over 40 years. That’ll mean two things: 1) we’ll thoroughly be relegated to a second rate program, and 2) half of us won’t be alive to see IU’s next title.  
 

Not a great coach and I’d rather IU keep cycling through coaches to find one. 

[str8baller]

1 hour ago, Uspshoosier said:

From what has been reported about that the staff had their top 11 and then they took fliers on 2 developmental players from over seas that didn’t cost anything (less the mid major players) both parties new what the situation was.   

Why would a kid leave a place he’s getting paid for a place he’s not? 
 

Either way, they’re taking up two roster spots. Nothing is lost by leaving them in Europe and bringing them over next year. 

[RoadRage]

2 minutes ago, str8baller said:

I sort of agree. Depends on your definition of “great coach.” My test case is Jim Boheim and if you think he’s a great coach. I don’t. Good but not great. 
 

He coached 40 years and won one title. It took him 26yrs. If IU hires a Jim Boheim they’ll win another title…over 40 years. That’ll mean two things: 1) we’ll thoroughly be relegated to a second rate program, and 2) half of us won’t be alive to see IU’s next title.  
 

Not a great coach and I’d rather IU keep cycling through coaches to find one. 

Good point….maybe we will get lucky, or just find the right guy that wants to come here, but how many times will that happen since in my opinion it just happened a couple of years ago!

[Jeff Flabjohns]

Boeheim made the second weekend 20 times. 5 final fours. 

[Uspshoosier]

19 minutes ago, str8baller said:

Why would a kid leave a place he’s getting paid for a place he’s not? 

 Couldn’t tell you. Maybe a better opportunity to make more over here in the long run.   I’ve heard some places over seas it’s hard to get paid even though they have contracts.  

[cbp4iu]

5 hours ago, BGleas said:

It's gonna need to be an A this off-season. 

Agreed an A with our starting 5 being all made from the portal. Any less than 5 serviceable starters will be stuck near the bubble

[Hoosier987]

3 hours ago, Stuhoo said:

It’s so much more cost-effective to have six potential returnees, all of whom will come fairly cheaply, and all of whom our staff has a clear sense of their value and whether they can contribute at the relatively low price they command.

Add our three incoming freshman to that mix, and we have nine slots where the staff already knows their value relative to budget.

Whereas for the year we’re currently in, the staff only knew value relative to budget for two guys, Enright and Tucker. Of those two, one of them has underperformed (Tucker) and one has over performed relative to their budgetary expectations.

It’s a huge advantage when trying to build a roster that will outperform expenditures to already have a sense of as many as nine of your 13 slots for next year.

3 slots by freshman coming in but we won’t have 6 slots taken up by all 6 players on this years’ team of which some have brought little to no production and that’s a good thing. There’s going to be changes. 
We’re going to need another major portal haul. 

 

[Shooter]

4 hours ago, BGleas said:

It's an interesting thing. In terms of basketball coaching, I think he's gotten more out of less. Not a great deal more, but IMO more out of less. That's meaning what he's done with this roster. 

In terms of the building of the roster and the money spent, we did not get the bang for our buck. Spending $10-$11M should have gotten us a legit power 5 big and point guard. 

That's why my big concern remains recruiting, not the actual coaching. 

Agree. I'd add "fund-raising" to the recruiting concern, since they are so closely connected now.

He doesn't have that super charismatic personality. He doesn't have decades-long personal relationships with key donors like Woodson did. So he needs to win to get everyone on board. Making the tourney this year is an important first step.