Possible Reason For The 2 Year Slide--The Failed Movement

[WindyCitySource 600]

The problems I have with this still point back to recruiting strategy.

Luke left mid year and Crean admitted to not being surprised by this. For a guy that over recruits every year, as soon as you suspect Luke may leave then go big man shopping.

Noah was on the lottery boards nearly all season. Even if Noah said he was coming back, Crean should have anticipated the pull might be too strong and that he might go. Again since over recruiting is the standard go out and get a replacement. Especially combined with Luke leaving.

Lastly you point out how hard it is to bring in a big. I agree so he should be over recruiting with bigs not wings annually. Not lowly ranked bigs until we have a staff that can develop but kids that can play soon.

 

It's a lot easier to overrecruit wings because they are way more of them. I don't know how much Crean could have known about Luke leaving early, or when/why he said that he wasn't surprised by it. But even if he did go out and try to get a big man right away, the assumption that an adequate replacement could be easily found and successfully recruited is a bit far-fetched. When you have to scramble for a big man to throw onto the roster, you end up with Jeremiah April. 

 

I agree that you have to recruit around your roster, but like I said, it's not easy to just find a Luke Fischer or Thomas Bryant on a whim. 

[8bucks 6,296]

It's a lot easier to overrecruit wings because they are way more of them. I don't know how much Crean could have known about Luke leaving early, or when/why he said that he wasn't surprised by it. But even if he did go out and try to get a big man right away, the assumption that an adequate replacement could be easily found and successfully recruited is a bit far-fetched. When you have to scramble for a big man to throw onto the roster, you end up with Jeremiah April.

I agree that you have to recruit around your roster, but like I said, it's not easy to just find a Luke Fischer or Thomas Bryant on a whim.

There are more wings which is why I don't understand the need to over recruit for them. Bigs are harder to come by so that should be prioritized.

Our problem is compounded by our inability to develop bigs. You need to come in as a McD big to really be a force here. If we could develop bigs then it would expand our pool of available bigs to recruit.

[Uspshoosier 44,711]

It's a lot easier to overrecruit wings because they are way more of them. I don't know how much Crean could have known about Luke leaving early, or when/why he said that he wasn't surprised by it. But even if he did go out and try to get a big man right away, the assumption that an adequate replacement could be easily found and successfully recruited is a bit far-fetched. When you have to scramble for a big man to throw onto the roster, you end up with Jeremiah April.

I agree that you have to recruit around your roster, but like I said, it's not easy to just find a Luke Fischer or Thomas Bryant on a whim.

even before luke left there were offers to multiple bigs for 2014 but for whatever reason they went elsewhere (goodluck,humphries(stanford signee), robinson(6'8) and leron black to name a few and then offered plenty in the late signing period (jonah bolden, marvin Clarke, josh cunningham (not really a big but was one of the last top 100 available, and even yante maten. When all 7 say no I guess u r left scrambling desperately and have to take a chance on some lower prospects

[WindyCitySource 600]

even before luke left there were offers to multiple bigs for 2014 but for whatever reason they went elsewhere (goodluck,humphries(stanford signee), robinson(6'8) and leron black to name a few and then offered plenty in the late signing period (jonah bolden, marvin Clarke, josh cunningham (not really a big but was one of the last top 100 available, and even yante maten. When all 7 say no I guess u r left scrambling desperately and have to take a chance on some lower prospects

 

A lot of those guys (all of them?) were being recruited to a team with Luke Fischer on the roster. Sales pitch changes a bit when you lose your supposed big man of the future. 

[8bucks 6,296]

A lot of those guys (all of them?) were being recruited to a team with Luke Fischer on the roster. Sales pitch changes a bit when you lose your supposed big man of the future.

How would the sales pitch change? Luke came in ranked in the 90's and had been hurt for much of the non BT season. He had just started to play and had 1 good game before he transfers. Do you think that the idea that Luke would be here next year would scare off that many prospects?

I get that Luke had not been able to demonstrate his capabilities but that is my point.

If you switch to Noah, then I would argue that him playing the 5 was him playing out of position. Had he came back he would have been a strong stretch 4 and would have created a need for a center anyway.

[Uspshoosier 44,711]

A lot of those guys (all of them?) were being recruited to a team with Luke Fischer on the roster. Sales pitch changes a bit when you lose your supposed big man of the future.

not the last 4 i mentioned they were all recruited after luke left I believe (maybe bolden was before)

[Alford Bailey 12,302]

even before luke left there were offers to multiple bigs for 2014 but for whatever reason they went elsewhere (goodluck,humphries(stanford signee), robinson(6'8) and leron black to name a few and then offered plenty in the late signing period (jonah bolden, marvin Clarke, josh cunningham (not really a big but was one of the last top 100 available, and even yante maten. When all 7 say no I guess u r left scrambling desperately and have to take a chance on some lower prospects

The spring of 2014 recruiting period especially sucked. Not sure what went wrong there. That was about as bad as the box of dead chicks I picked up at the post office the other day, lol.

[Uspshoosier 44,711]

The spring of 2014 recruiting period especially sucked. Not sure what went wrong there. That was about as bad as the box of dead chicks I picked up at the post office the other day, lol.

hope they were insured lol

[HoosierHoops1 5,024]

good talent and character evaluation would have avoided all those things. How was our staff so far off on 80% of them? Like not even close to being anything remotely close to what we needed at IU...

It wasn't "our staff missed" as much as it was "EVERYONE MISSED".

 

ESPN had Peter Jurkin #37. That's a high 4 star. Hanner was a 4 star. Hollowell was a 4 star. Patterson was a high 3 star, but supposedly a defensive stopper and Yogi was a 5 star stud PG. And, considering there was a player at every position, it seemed like the perfect, monster class.

 

Go read old threads, articles and reviews. People were wanting Hollowell, wanting Patterson, wanting Hanner and Peter. On paper it was a can't miss class and we had just won 6 and 10 games.

[sddowning 146]

It wasn't "our staff missed" as much as it was "EVERYONE MISSED".

ESPN had Peter Jurkin #37. That's a high 4 star. Hanner was a 4 star. Hollowell was a 4 star. Patterson was a high 3 star, but supposedly a defensive stopper and Yogi was a 5 star stud PG. And, considering there was a player at every position, it seemed like the perfect, monster class.

Go read old threads, articles and reviews. People were wanting Hollowell, wanting Patterson, wanting Hanner and Peter. On paper it was a can't miss class and we had just won 6 and 10 games.

Jurkin was a three star on ESPN and rated as the 26th best center in that class. No where near a high four star.

[MikeRoberts 6,877]

even before luke left there were offers to multiple bigs for 2014 but for whatever reason they went elsewhere (goodluck,humphries(stanford signee), robinson(6'8) and leron black to name a few and then offered plenty in the late signing period (jonah bolden, marvin Clarke, josh cunningham (not really a big but was one of the last top 100 available, and even yante maten. When all 7 say no I guess u r left scrambling desperately and have to take a chance on some lower prospects

can you imagine why they said no? The vast majority of those guys you named are not 5s and some not even true 4s. They probably knew they were going to be forced to play out of position. How do we whiff on so many though is hard to fathom.

[MikeRoberts 6,877]

Biggest mistake Crean has made was taking Vonleh over Anya. Anya is not a badass but he would have anchored the middle and been a good rim protector and rebounder for years. Crean went with the flashier guy and it didn't work.

Anya was set to choose IU when he took Vonleh and forced Anya to plan B NC state

[MikeRoberts 6,877]

It wasn't "our staff missed" as much as it was "EVERYONE MISSED".

ESPN had Peter Jurkin #37. That's a high 4 star. Hanner was a 4 star. Hollowell was a 4 star. Patterson was a high 3 star, but supposedly a defensive stopper and Yogi was a 5 star stud PG. And, considering there was a player at every position, it seemed like the perfect, monster class.

Go read old threads, articles and reviews. People were wanting Hollowell, wanting Patterson, wanting Hanner and Peter. On paper it was a can't miss class and we had just won 6 and 10 games.

the only people that missed was IU. Nobody else had as much skin in the game as IU. Recruiting services have thousands of kids To rank, fans look at recruiting services, it's up to the coaches to get it right on the few guys they take. They got it wrong

[Old Friend 8,389]

This is not in my opinion a possible reason, it's the reason.   This was a group of players who were very flawed.  Hollowell was very lazy in high school, and that was a topic of conversation among many coaches.   Perea and Jurkin were both very raw (lacking the instinct and fundamentals - critical things to success at this level - to make an impact) and Jurkin really had no business playing in the Big Ten.   Patterson, I think, would have been really good were his head on straight, but...it wasn't, and his grades showed as much.   

 

There are certainly other reasons; but "the movement" was an abysmal failure.   The "why" deserves a deeper look, and I think it falls on a simple recruiting strategy.   Peeling back that onion...   What was Crean's strategy with that group?  What roles did he see the players filling?   Perea had very limited skills as a basketball player, but was a freak athlete.  Jurkin was rail thin and incapable of defending any Big Ten post player.   Hollowell was talented but pretty slow and definitely a lazy player who didn't put much time into improving his overall game (so say a few coaches I've heard from), and Patterson was a very small shooting guard.    To me, this class - while full of highly rated kids - was a flawed class to begin with, and it manifested into something which has defined an entire half-decade of IU basketball.    Crean really hasn't put together a class of kids or even classes of kids that seem to fit.  

 

The NCAA tournament just showed - in my mind - what wins.   You have to move people and you have to move the ball.  You have to have kids who understand spacing and said movement.  You have to have kids who can play without the ball and who understand shot quality and playing without turning it over, all while putting a ton of effort into taking away what other teams want to do.   This class ("the movement") was full of kids who either needed the ball or didn't really have the instinct to be effective at Indiana.

 

This thread is a great catalyst to a call for Crean to improve.  Rather than trying to simply get highly rated kids to say yes, go get basketball players.  Go recruit smart kids who understand before they get here how to play without the ball and who can succeed without alley-oop passes or isolations run for them.    Or maybe better said "go recruit more of those kids."   

[Old Friend 8,389]

It wasn't "our staff missed" as much as it was "EVERYONE MISSED".

 

ESPN had Peter Jurkin #37. That's a high 4 star. Hanner was a 4 star. Hollowell was a 4 star. Patterson was a high 3 star, but supposedly a defensive stopper and Yogi was a 5 star stud PG. And, considering there was a player at every position, it seemed like the perfect, monster class.

 

Go read old threads, articles and reviews. People were wanting Hollowell, wanting Patterson, wanting Hanner and Peter. On paper it was a can't miss class and we had just won 6 and 10 games.

If our staff is relying on what recruiting experts say and just picking guys who have x-number of stars, they're not doing their job.  Even Kentucky, who was incredibly talented and may have had as many collective stars as any team ever assembled, lost to a "team" of kids who played terrific roles and who probably didn't have 20% of the collective "stars" when they were recruited that Kentucky had.   UK had better players, Wisconsin had a much better "team," and the team - smart kids who played roles - won.    This is sort of my point re: Crean.  He can get certain kids to say yes, but he struggles to build consistent teams and struggles to get kids who can gel and play well together for multiple years.   That's why it's hard for me to really get excited for next year.  We'll have good players, but will we have a great team?  Will we have another good team in 2016-2017?    I can't say that.    "Stars" don't make a kid a valuable player on a given team...the pieces still have to fit.

[Lt. John McClaine 541]

"The Movement" is maybe one of the most overrated recruiting classes that IU has ever had.  I hate saying that because Yogi has been fantastic and could go down as one of the best point guards that IU has ever had, certainly in my era.  However, everyone else did not perform much if at all for IU.  Jurkin was a complete waste of a scholarship, we all know about Patterson and the grades, Hollowell had on court and off court issues, and then there's Hanner, who's definitely the 2nd best out of the group, but we had to wait 3 seasons to get even decent play out of him.

 

The problem with striking out on a recruiting class if you don't do something about it quickly then it really put you behind; couple that with injuries, transfers, and off the court issues and a small problem becomes a big problem and you miss out on the tournament.  Certainly, the Staff might have suspected that the Hoosiers would fall off a little bit when Zeller left, and I don't think that the staff had any clue that Victor would blow up the way he did and become an early entry number 2 pick in the NBA Draft.  It stinks, but I really do think that we're back on track at the moment.  I'm very excited for next year.  

[JSHoosier 19,706]

The 2012 class aside from one player has been a total bust, no denying that one.  How does it reflect on the staff though?  I don't want this to come off as a Crean 'bashing', but I think it has to reflect on his ability as a recruiter or developer.  

 

Recruiting services have to evaluate so many kids that it's impossible to get an entirely accurate ranking, they do mean something but there is also a lot of error.  Crean doesn't have to evaluate as nearly as many kids when he's recruiting so he can pay attention to certain players more.  He had to have seen that Hanner was nothing but a freak athlete, if he didn't that has to reflect poorly on him as a recruiter and if he knew Hanner was incredibly raw but thought he could develop the potential then where Hanner currently is as a player doesn't reflect well on him as a developer; while Hanner is better he's not exactly good.

 

At some point, IMO, the complete whiff of practically an entire class has to reflect on Crean to some extent.

 

EDIT:  The bowel movement certainly didn't help, but let's be honest with ourselves here; this 2 year slide happened to Crean at Marquette too, so it's not new.

[Old Friend 8,389]

The 2012 class aside from one player has been a total bust, no denying that one.  How does it reflect on the staff though?  I don't want this to come off as a Crean 'bashing', but I think it has to reflect on his ability as a recruiter or developer.  

 

Recruiting services have to evaluate so many kids that it's impossible to get an entirely accurate ranking, they do mean something but there is also a lot of error.  Crean doesn't have to evaluate as nearly as many kids when he's recruiting so he can pay attention to certain players more.  He had to have seen that Hanner was nothing but a freak athlete, if he didn't that has to reflect poorly on him as a recruiter and if he knew Hanner was incredibly raw but thought he could develop the potential then where Hanner currently is as a player doesn't reflect well on him as a developer; while Hanner is better he's not exactly good.

 

At some point, IMO, the complete whiff of practically an entire class has to reflect on Crean to some extent.

 

EDIT:  The bowel movement certainly didn't help, but let's be honest with ourselves here; this 2 year slide happened to Crean at Marquette too, so it's not new.

There are times I wonder if Crean is made of teflon.  I have not heard nor seen him held accountable for the under-achievements, but I STILL hear how bad things were when he got here in 2008 ......6 months before Barack Obama was elected for the first time, for the sake of perspective.   What we have and what we've had is a mish mash of players rather than a program; and that's been frustrating.   That class was a microcosm of the recruiting record he brought here.   Heck, SINCE the movement, Remy Abell, Max Hoetzel, Luke Fischer, Austin Etherington, and Stanford Robinson have all left or been asked to leave.  It's not like the poor record stopped at one class or that one class is an anomaly for him.    It's a pattern that really needs to stop or at least slow down significantly.

[duanehunter 1]

And do not forget we had a big man in Luke Fisher that left us high and dry. If he had stayed this season should have been much better.

[NRT137 316]

And do not forget we had a big man in Luke Fisher that left us high and dry. If he had stayed this season should have been much better.

So essentially, if Luke would have stayed, would many iu fans have taken back their rage about Tom Crean and would he have been liked better as a coach if Luke Fischer had led us to 4 more wins than without him?