I guess that it is the eye of the beholder on whose prospects is legitimate or not, but it does seem that some on here believe that the more negative their views of the team are then the more legitimate their views are as well. Can this team win a championship next year? I believe that it is possible but a lot has to do with a lot of variables outside the control of the team. But I do not believe that the ceiling is a sweet sixteen for Coach Crean. To me that makes no sense whatsoever, but everyone has their opinions.
Our guard play is questionable.
Questionable. So we question it. It's going to be talked about constantly from now until the season starts and probably after. It will certainly be mentioned by ESPN, CBS, and by every freakin media outlet that follows and reports on IU basketball on the preseason breakdowns.
Are they being negative too? Are they HATERZ? Or are they just pointing out the obvious? Why is it so GD hard to talk about it on this forum without someone bleating silly accusations of negativity?
RJ's decision making has been weak, he had a 20% TO ratio, while playing a role and position that is known to not have that much opportunity for TO's. Do you get that? The 2 guard position, especially when played by a shooter averages the least amount of TO's of any other position in basketball and has for at least 50 years. 20% is way too high.
So if a player playing a majority of his time at that position has a TO rate that high and that player is being talked about as a possible PG... Well, that's deserves to be questioned.
Someone keeps mentioning Troy's TO's were higher. They were very close, BUT, Troy was a slashing wing player. That role tends to have the highest TO rate, but it is balanced by having higher FT rates. (FT created)
RJ not only had a high TO rate but a low FT rate, even for his role and position. So he wasn't an effective penetrating "slasher" so there's no reason to have that many TO's. That points to him being ineffective so far as a ball handler. Any coach that uses analytics would probably limit his ball-handling at least until he improved.
He had a decent Ast ratio, but with that high of a TO%, it wipes it out. Also, good Ast ratio, + low FT ratio, + high TO's = poor decisions, or bad vision and awareness, or gambling too much. Those traits do not scream PG. Probably best as a secondary ballhandler unless he improves drastically.
That's not negativity, nor an opinion, it's just math and reality. He doesn't produce enough per minute either. The only above average trait he has is his shooting but that's another discussion.
Newkirk. He's known as being ineffective as a shooter, average as a distributor but quick and a good ballhandler. Teams have backed off on him in the past, and probably will again until he proves he can shoot. So far his best role is as a back up PG. We'll most likely ask a little more than that. So he's also questionable and there's nothing wrong with saying so.
When an opposing team's scouting report says the same damn thing will one of you bleat about negativity then?
Ridiculous ..
fwiw - Crean is also questionable as a coach, that's why his ability is constantly questioned. It has nothing to do with emotional "feelings" or if we like him or not. Which seems to be the limit of reasoning for many on this board.
Yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay team! We're the BESTEST!