Hoosier Daily: August 29
- Thread starter MikeSinger
- Start date
This actually has the biggest IU basketball news of the summer in it, and it concerns finally changing the offense.
Three key points:
1) Miller is a young coach who is still growing on the fly- or at least smart enough to be introspective of his previous travails.
2) Miller is looking to change the offense to get more movement away from the ball. This is a very very good thing.
3) The arrival of Roberts may signify a keen awareness by Miller that the offense he has used has not worked, and influences from
former Hoosiers who have been around successful teams is in store.
Finally, Miller used a key term, "steward". He understands the product needs to be changed to get to something former Hoosiers can be proud of. A steward of all the decades of IU basketball lore.
Good stuff.
Three key points:
1) Miller is a young coach who is still growing on the fly- or at least smart enough to be introspective of his previous travails.
2) Miller is looking to change the offense to get more movement away from the ball. This is a very very good thing.
3) The arrival of Roberts may signify a keen awareness by Miller that the offense he has used has not worked, and influences from
former Hoosiers who have been around successful teams is in store.
Finally, Miller used a key term, "steward". He understands the product needs to be changed to get to something former Hoosiers can be proud of. A steward of all the decades of IU basketball lore.
Good stuff.
this narrative is BS .. born from two less than satisfying seasons at IU. Sure he's had middling level offenses, even at Dayton. Sure he had a dysfunctional offense last year .. but you make it sound like it's dysfunctional in its philosophy and ex IU players are going to fix it only because they're ex IU players..
Use Tony Bennett's offense from 12 and 13 to gauge his offenses proficiency? It's improved drastically since. What changed, the offense, or the players running it? Or did he hire ex IU players to fix it.. lol
the rest of the post is good, but that ... it's fan level reasoning and BS.
I think he wants to change the offense. I think he brought in an assistant who has been successful with offense.
Even at Dayton, the initiation of Archie's offense has been a high ball screen. At IU the past 2 years, that is often followed by a pass to a wing who simply replaces the PG, and then it repeats. Time and again it has been ineffective.
I do agree that if the PG was able to really accelerate off of that pick and beat or split the help, it would be more effective.
But if we could break down efficiency in the offense based off the single or double high ball screen, vs. when they got the ball inside to Morgan, I think it would be clear.
A contrast, and a system that I think works better, is what Purdue does. They use up cuts-often coming all the way through from the baseline, and then the bigs position themselves for a ball entry at the free throw line. It gives the ball handler better options and it puts a ton of stress on the defenders covering the player who cuts out on the wing.
Even at Dayton, the initiation of Archie's offense has been a high ball screen. At IU the past 2 years, that is often followed by a pass to a wing who simply replaces the PG, and then it repeats. Time and again it has been ineffective.
I do agree that if the PG was able to really accelerate off of that pick and beat or split the help, it would be more effective.
But if we could break down efficiency in the offense based off the single or double high ball screen, vs. when they got the ball inside to Morgan, I think it would be clear.
A contrast, and a system that I think works better, is what Purdue does. They use up cuts-often coming all the way through from the baseline, and then the bigs position themselves for a ball entry at the free throw line. It gives the ball handler better options and it puts a ton of stress on the defenders covering the player who cuts out on the wing.
So I don't mean to sound as if Roberts is here to bring order to the offense as a former player. I just think he may help, particularly with some of the pick and roll work for big guys. The UNCG slip screen alley oop- that is something I could see coming from Roberts directly, although it isn't a particularly complicated play.
Anyway, I think Miller is indicating that he wants to change some things, and I see that as a good thing. I don't think Alan Henderson and AJ Guyton get that much more from that initial high ball screen than Rob and Morgan did. Maybe Yogi. It actually has worked a lot better off the pick and roll, but that has generally come from the wing instead of the top. That first pick off the top is unnecessary and it simply puts a big guy in the way who cant shoot. (I guess in that light, Haston would help and you made that point). Still, I don't like that initiation.
Anyway, I think Miller is indicating that he wants to change some things, and I see that as a good thing. I don't think Alan Henderson and AJ Guyton get that much more from that initial high ball screen than Rob and Morgan did. Maybe Yogi. It actually has worked a lot better off the pick and roll, but that has generally come from the wing instead of the top. That first pick off the top is unnecessary and it simply puts a big guy in the way who cant shoot. (I guess in that light, Haston would help and you made that point). Still, I don't like that initiation.
Compare him to Tony Bennett? You really are a silly fanboy. The issue is Archie isn't a good offensive coach.
Last edited:
Hopefully the discussion is more about what he can do to improve, or to point out that he indicated some changes are coming.
We have enough threads that just rip on each other.
What would you change about the offense, in consideration, as Miller points out, that IU has a bigger roster this year with more versatility?
1. Fire an assistant coach and hire one that specializes on offense. Archie hasn't had an elite offense in 8 years and next year looks like more the same.
2. Hold players more accountable for shot selection. It's pathetic that he allowed Romeo, Smith, and Morgan to shoot the amount of 3's they did.
3. Try to get out in transition more.
4. I assume they are going to play through the post more (I doubt it matters).
5. Play elite defense. Were not going to win games because of our offense. We will probably score in the low 70's and be outside the top 50, in efficiency, again. .
Last edited:
1.) Half way.
2.) Sounds like he will. Says he wants Smith to focus on defense.
3.) I agree. That was supposed to happen with Miller's teams and it seems to me it happened less last year than the year before.
4.) Yes, and that can happen in many ways. I prefer a high-low like they tried to do with Fitzner on occasion. Davis is apt at recognizing and passing out of doubles, so that may happen more with more PT this year. I don't think most teams will double Brink, so he will have to make good decisions and not hold the ball too long.
5.) The defense has been good enough. They guarded Wisconsin, Purdue, MSU, Louisville..... They need to score buckets.
2.) Sounds like he will. Says he wants Smith to focus on defense.
3.) I agree. That was supposed to happen with Miller's teams and it seems to me it happened less last year than the year before.
4.) Yes, and that can happen in many ways. I prefer a high-low like they tried to do with Fitzner on occasion. Davis is apt at recognizing and passing out of doubles, so that may happen more with more PT this year. I don't think most teams will double Brink, so he will have to make good decisions and not hold the ball too long.
5.) The defense has been good enough. They guarded Wisconsin, Purdue, MSU, Louisville..... They need to score buckets.
I think that one may be doing too much projection in the above attempted analysis of CAM's remarks at E'ville. Yes, in the last two years IU's offense was not good at all. Is it due to what was related above?
I think it was due more to the lack of an experienced, really good PG. Also it was due to the fact that IU's roster really wasn't complete. Players played out of position, couldn't hit 3's or free throws. Players, also at times especially last year, just looked on offense like someone else needs to shoot...not the guy with the ball.
If you look at Dayton's offense, one might say that it was really inefficient and was flawed. But that is really inaccurate and misrepresents what happened at Dayton.
I posted this a few days ago in another thread: According to TOS "Miller's abilities as an offensive coach have probably been understated. In five of his six years at Dayton, his teams posted an adjusted offensive efficiency inside the top 75 nationally..." But these numbers also may be misrepresenting CAM's abilities both pro and con. In Dayton he may not have been able to attract the level of recruits that he may get at IU. Also in-conference competition may not be up to that of the B1G. In 4 of 5 seasons, Dayton was in the top 53 in adjusted offensive efficiency...very impressive to me...for Dayton.
Plus, Dayton teams got to the foul line...in the top 75 nationally in his last 3 seasons (FTA/FGA). In 2 of those years Dayton was in the top 10 nationally...showing me that Miller had an attack inside focus. We will see if that works as well in the B1G. Full disclosure shows that they didn't rebound well in his last 3 years...maybe because of his focus on getting back on defense.
They also had a relatively high assist percentage and ranked in the top 30 for 2 years. They were rather efficient on offense.
At Dayton, these things stood out about CAM: 1. He was flexible on offense and adjusted due to personnel; 2. The teams got better as the season progressed; 3. The pack-line defense and the offense did work when the players were seasoned; 4. They were great representatives of the university; 5. He didn't BS.
The last two years at IU were not representative of what he will do in the future...except for focus on building the roster from the ground up and his focus on fundamentals
I think it was due more to the lack of an experienced, really good PG. Also it was due to the fact that IU's roster really wasn't complete. Players played out of position, couldn't hit 3's or free throws. Players, also at times especially last year, just looked on offense like someone else needs to shoot...not the guy with the ball.
If you look at Dayton's offense, one might say that it was really inefficient and was flawed. But that is really inaccurate and misrepresents what happened at Dayton.
I posted this a few days ago in another thread: According to TOS "Miller's abilities as an offensive coach have probably been understated. In five of his six years at Dayton, his teams posted an adjusted offensive efficiency inside the top 75 nationally..." But these numbers also may be misrepresenting CAM's abilities both pro and con. In Dayton he may not have been able to attract the level of recruits that he may get at IU. Also in-conference competition may not be up to that of the B1G. In 4 of 5 seasons, Dayton was in the top 53 in adjusted offensive efficiency...very impressive to me...for Dayton.
Plus, Dayton teams got to the foul line...in the top 75 nationally in his last 3 seasons (FTA/FGA). In 2 of those years Dayton was in the top 10 nationally...showing me that Miller had an attack inside focus. We will see if that works as well in the B1G. Full disclosure shows that they didn't rebound well in his last 3 years...maybe because of his focus on getting back on defense.
They also had a relatively high assist percentage and ranked in the top 30 for 2 years. They were rather efficient on offense.
At Dayton, these things stood out about CAM: 1. He was flexible on offense and adjusted due to personnel; 2. The teams got better as the season progressed; 3. The pack-line defense and the offense did work when the players were seasoned; 4. They were great representatives of the university; 5. He didn't BS.
The last two years at IU were not representative of what he will do in the future...except for focus on building the roster from the ground up and his focus on fundamentals
TOS should have provided more context with the numbers. Archie's most efficient offenses were his first 3 seasons. All were top 40. Years 3-6 they were ranked 75,146, and 53 (Compare that to his defensive ranks which trend in the opposite direction). I think it's fair/logical to conclude Archie isn't a very good offensive coach. Also, efficiency numbers control for SOS.
Last edited:
