Stan Robinson transferring

[BenzOrBeamer 351]

The difference is that Crean kept him for as long as Crean thought Stan could help him. When it ended, Crean pushed him out. That is the essence of being "creaned". And the term is quite appropriate, IMO.

Great way to sum it up

[Kyleweberiu 386]

Wasn't a fan, but thanks for choosing to be a Hoosier! Best of luck

[LIHoosier 25,821]

Then why even....

1. Recruit him to begin with. Poor scouting

2. Not teach him to shoot. Poor coaching

The temerity of you to question our generation's version of "A Beautiful Mind". ;)

[Demo 19,603]

The difference is that Crean kept him for as long as Crean thought Stan could help him. When it ended, Crean pushed him out. That is the essence of being "creaned". And the term is quite appropriate, IMO.

Couple of things:

1) Are you arguing that Crean would have kicked Stan off of the team in November if he didn't "need" him? If so, what do you base that on? Also, are you arguing that doing so would have been better for Stan?  If so, I don't see that at all. Unless I'm misunderstanding you I would ask you to expand on those points.

2) Crean pushed him out. First, I'm pretty sure we don't know that, but it's certainly fun to speculate about when we hate the coach, right?  2nd, I don't think it's too long a stretch to think that Stan can look at the makeup of this team going forward and realize that his role will probably be limited. If he then decided that he would rather try to play 25 mins/gm somewhere else than 10 mins/game here, then looking elsewhere seems like a reasonable conclusion for him to draw. And even if CTC or another coach told him that he was going to have to improve a bunch to expand his role or he was looking at shrinking minutes, that strikes me as a perfectly reasonable conversation to have with a scholarship athlete and that, to me, is not pushing him out.

    If you have more information on this, I would appreciate it if you filled in the blanks.

[HoosierSadaseci 2,258]

Hope he gets himself right, and has better success elsewhere, he didn't make the expected freshman to sophomore jump, maybe a change in scenery, and coaching, will help him meet his potential.

[bnkepner 1,509]

Why would you take them over Stan? They've never played 1 game of college ball. Let's not pretend these guys are 5 star guys. Stan was a decent in ball defender to boot, who else on the team can you say that about?

Let's not forget what a team full of junior and seniors can do. Hulls, Vic, watford, elston. Instead we have no seniors or maybe 1 or two

Stan only decided to show up and actually play ball in the last game of the year. Regressing from freshman to sophomore didn't bode well for him. His jump shot somehow got even worse and anytime he had the ball at the basket..he looked like he had no idea what sport he was playing. At least OG and Juwan provide a little potential

A team full of juniors and seniors with Hulls, Vic, Watford, and Elston…lets see don't everyone complain that they underachieved anyways? I don't see your point

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

Look, this is such a great opportunity for the Crean haters to push their propaganda.

"Oh, another player Creaned!"

Go check out the transfer rates in the B1G and college ball. Crean is not an extreme or an outlier. He had a transfer rate, as of last year, of around 1.5 which was marginally higher than the B1G average of around 1.2-1.3.

Also, there are definitely many people who have ripped Stan all season and called for his removal after he failed another drug test over the summer. Now you're claiming Crean only kept him to save his job, and that justifies calling this a "Creaning". This is ridiculous.

I think Stan needs to be somewhere where he can be the primary focus on the team for a coach. A year off to practice and develop will really help his game. I hope he blows up his senior year. He's made some dumb mistakes, but we all saw his potential last season. As mentioned earlier, he was crucial to Crean's first win against Wisconsin, a top 5 team at the time, and Bo Ryan since God knows when.

I'm ready for a coaching change like most, but let's not let our frustration be reflected in our treatment and judgement of Stan Robinson. Let's act like we're one of the most intelligent fan bases in the country, and stop taking every chance to blast our coach with misguided criticism.

It's too ironic to listen to those blasting Crean's transfer history complain when a player, who they wanted removed in the first place, transfers. Absolutely hilarious.

[AZ Hoosier 6,545]

Look, this is such a great opportunity for the Crean haters to push their propaganda.

"Oh, another player Creaned!"

Go check out the transfer rates in the B1G and college ball. Crean is not an extreme or an outlier. He had a transfer rate, as of last year, of around 1.5 which was marginally higher than the B1G average of around 1.2-1.3.

It's too ironic to listen to those blasting Crean's transfer history complain when a player, who they wanted removed in the first place, transfers. Absolutely hilarious.

 

Sounds good. Except you forget the concept of "creaning" involves artificially high transfer rates under Crean because of the chronic oversigning. 

 

Sure, overall transfer rates are very high in D-1 basketball. But Crean's numbers are higher than they need to be because he signs more players than he has scholarships for, forcing several of those with scholarships to give up their opportunity for an Indiana University sheepskin to make room for the incoming recruiting class. That is not fair to the kids, yet once again, IUBB finds itself with more kids than slots.

 

I'd be very interested in hearing how this "Student-Athlete Bill of Rights" that IU instituted will ultimately factor into this chronic oversigning. Clearly there will be an issue trying to reconcile Crean's modus operandi against the new university policy.

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

Sounds good. Except you forget the concept of "creaning" involves artificially high transfer rates under Crean because of the chronic oversigning.

Sure, overall transfer rates are very high in D-1 basketball. But Crean's numbers are higher than they need to be because he signs more players than he has scholarships for, forcing several of those with scholarships to give up their opportunity for an Indiana University sheepskin to make room for the incoming recruiting class. That is not fair to the kids, yet once again, IUBB finds itself with more kids than slots.

I'd be very interested in hearing how this "Student-Athlete Bill of Rights" that IU instituted will ultimately factor into this chronic oversigning. Clearly there will be an issue trying to reconcile Crean's modus operandi against the new university policy.

Did you actually go look at the numbers? It sounds like you didn't.

Read: http://www.crimsonquarry.com/2014/3/26/5549544/transfers-and-the-big-ten-tom-creans-epidemic

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

Sounds good. Except you forget the concept of "creaning" involves artificially high transfer rates under Crean because of the chronic oversigning.

Sure, overall transfer rates are very high in D-1 basketball. But Crean's numbers are higher than they need to be because he signs more players than he has scholarships for, forcing several of those with scholarships to give up their opportunity for an Indiana University sheepskin to make room for the incoming recruiting class. That is not fair to the kids, yet once again, IUBB finds itself with more kids than slots.

I'd be very interested in hearing how this "Student-Athlete Bill of Rights" that IU instituted will ultimately factor into this chronic oversigning. Clearly there will be an issue trying to reconcile Crean's modus operandi against the new university policy.

Also, are his transfer rates "high" because he over signs, or does he over sign because of transfer rates? If you know you're going to lose one or two players a year to transfer, based on the trend in college basketball, you better be prepared to fill those gaps.

I'm not saying he's done a good job replacing these transfers with position needs, but neither you nor I know the reasons behind the over sign.

Point is, don't be so quick to treat Stanford's transfer like another mistreated player forced out by Big Bad Crean.

[Alford Bailey 12,350]

Also, are his transfer rates "high" because he over signs, or does he over sign because of transfer rates? If you know you're going to lose one or two players a year to transfer, based on the trend in college basketball, you better be prepared to fill those gaps.

I'm not saying he's done a good job replacing these transfers with position needs, but neither you nor I know the reasons behind the over sign.

Point is, don't be so quick to treat Stanford's transfer like another mistreated player forced out by Big Bad Crean.

This is one creaning I am 100% behind. Trouble has left the building.

[Uwe Robb 1,072]

Did you actually go look at the numbers? It sounds like you didn't.

Read: http://www.crimsonquarry.com/2014/3/26/5549544/transfers-and-the-big-ten-tom-creans-epidemic

Would Yogi, Matt Roth or Nick Z be factored into these numbers?

 

*If Yogi and Z leave (I hope this does not happen)

[swatford 1,235]

Sucks to see him go from the perspective that he got along great with our team and seemed like the glue guy off the court.

[OliviaPope40 6,436]

I just hope that Max or Nick don't leave because I told that every time I change my name whoever I pick as my favorite player leaves and I don't want to change it again. Sorry mods I know this is about Stan but I just needed to vent a little.

[Uwe Robb 1,072]

Chronic Hoosier‏@ChronicHoosier·49 mins49 minutes ago
In 7 seasons Crean has had 99 players (scholly & non) eligible to return the next year; 27.3% have left #iubb with eligibility remaining.

 

These numbers speak a little different. If 1/4 of your team is leaving each year, it is tough to gel and ever become a veteran team. You may have a Senior or two, but you will never be a veteran TEAM that has multiple years of experience playing with each other.

[BenzOrBeamer 351]

Chronic Hoosier‏@ChronicHoosier·49 mins49 minutes ago
In 7 seasons Crean has had 99 players (scholly & non) eligible to return the next year; 27.3% have left #iubb with eligibility remaining.

These numbers speak a little different. If 1/4 of your team is leaving each year, it is tough to gel and ever become a veteran team. You may have a Senior or two, but you will never be a veteran TEAM that has multiple years of experience playing with each other.

That is crazy. If your going to be recruiting mostly 3 star players it's very important they develop to seniors

[TrueHoosier62 1,592]

Chronic Hoosier‏@ChronicHoosier·49 mins49 minutes ago
In 7 seasons Crean has had 99 players (scholly & non) eligible to return the next year; 27.3% have left #iubb with eligibility remaining.

 

These numbers speak a little different. If 1/4 of your team is leaving each year, it is tough to gel and ever become a veteran team. You may have a Senior or two, but you will never be a veteran TEAM that has multiple years of experience playing with each other.

The only proviso I would add to your post is that assuming you included the team Crean inherited, which was either already on the way out the door, or did so after he arrived for reasons not related to Crean's questionable recruiting practices, those numbers would be a bit skewed. I'm not fan of what Crean does with recruiting, regardless of it being common practice elsewhere, but also wouldn't want his defection ratios misrepresented. Regardless of whether Stan Robinson's departure is directly attributable to "Creaning" or not, there's little doubt that Crean builds these things in to his approach to recruiting, and therefore, his "intent" is at best, suspect.

[Uwe Robb 1,072]

The only proviso I would add to your post is that assuming you included the team Crean inherited, which was either already on the way out the door, or did so after he arrived for reasons not related to Crean's questionable recruiting practices, those numbers would be a bit skewed. I'm not fan of what Crean does with recruiting, regardless of it being common practice elsewhere, but also wouldn't want his defection ratios misrepresented. Regardless of whether Stan Robinson's departure is directly attributable to "Creaning" or not, there's little doubt that Crean builds these things in to his approach to recruiting, and therefore, his "intent" is at best, suspect.

Got this number from Chronic Hoosier on Twitter. I do not believe it reflects the players that left from Sampson's team. The only part about this number anyone can question is that it does include his 3 draft picks that left early for NBA. But Chronic said that was still only 3/27 players. So still right at the 1/4 mark.

[Uwe Robb 1,072]

Ran some numbers and here are your averages for Sweet 16 rosters this year, and if I was a betting man I would say these averages would go up once you get to Elite 8 or Final Four

 

Juniors - 3.75 players per team

Seniors - 2.87 players per team

 

IU - Next Year

Juniors - Devin, Stan, Troy, Colin

Seniors - Yogi, Nick, Hanner, Ryan

 

My worry is if you cross out Nick and Yogi, then look at who is leading our team next year.

[navyhoosier07 26]

Either next season or the year after whoever gets Stan will probably end up in at least the Sweet 16. How many former IU/Crean players contribute on successful NCAA Tournament teams.