If IU doesn't get Miller,where do they go from here? Wait for spring or grad tranfers or hold them for 22?
- Thread starter Tru2Irish
- Start date
The frontcourt will be very thin next year. Need a transfer or Grad Transfer badly. Don't think they can wait until 22.
I hope we get Miller , but the fact he has never made an on campus visit to Bloomington makes me feel he is not coming to B-Town . Hope I'm wrong!! That being said I hope this board doesn't go total Ape sh&it crazy if he goes to Creighton . Also is it true that he has family who is on the Creighton coaching staff . If so that could have a big influence on his choice .
They'll be options ..
Alway is...
They may not be great ones though..
Who know's
Furst ..Kaufman..Miller all three aren't program changers.
But we do need another big..Preferably 6'10 ish..And athletic !!
.
Alway is...
They may not be great ones though..
Who know's
Furst ..Kaufman..Miller all three aren't program changers.
But we do need another big..Preferably 6'10 ish..And athletic !!
.
are you kidding? furst and kaufman would have been absolute program changers. ask arch.
Anthony Davis...that's a program changer..
It's just at UK they have 3 -5 every year.
It's just at UK they have 3 -5 every year.
Why are people so upset with losing Miller? He’s not a true post player. He wants sag out to the perimeter. We need a true stretch 4 and he’s not it.
We don't need a back up four for next year, we have two players in that position and neither TK or MM would have been higher in the rotation.
It was more important that we had someone waiting in the wings for following years The only role we currently need (for next year) is another actual post player. It would be better to have two more but whatever.
Positional needs... not only for next year but onward for development and continuity.
2 more post players. 1 more PG, 1 more 4. then another PG. Neither KF or MM are high priority needs. Gifted players but not as important as people make it out to be,.
We need bigs but we need bigs that CAN guard the lane.
Agreed. Miller would be nice to have but wouldn't solve the need IU has on the front line.
It's the cumulative effect of losing Furst, then Kaufman (who being from Southern IN and w Furst already at PU, seemed almost a lock), and now Miller, who felt like a backup plan. Not good when the backup 'chute doesn't open... know what I mean?
Post player? No ones upset about losing him as a post... but have you watched our team the last few years? Shooting hasn't exactly been a strength. That's why posters are upset.
Said it all along, and remember you arguing with me last year, but the '20 class makeup was a mistake, now glaringly. We should have had a post in that class developing, rather than 3 more wings. Should've picked 1 of Galloway or Leal and had a post in that class. I think Archie's pendulum of a more selective approach has swung too far it seems, and we need to cast a little wider net, or at least stop fishing with a single hook.
But that’s infantile knee jerk reactions. He’s not a fit. Tom Crean used to just get guys to be getting them. We have plenty of wing players in his mold that are quicker and may be more accurate. We don’t know yet.
The knee jerk reaction is a guy on an IU bulletin board saying he's not a fit... then why was the coaching staff recruiting him? We've lacked shooting since CAM's been here and this kid was reknowned to be a shooter. If they offered and recruited him, then I have to accept he was a fit. Besides, Dunscomb isn't a shooter, nor is Muhammed... so deductive reasoning says Miller would've been expected to be. It happens, we miss on guys, so now we need to see what Archie's fall back is. I'm not being reactive, but it is fair to ask questions and not try and say "he's not a fit" or "we didn't want/need him!". If either of those are the case, then we shouldn't have wasted time recruiting him.
Why do you think Archie wasted so much time pursuing someone who’s “not a fit”? Doesn’t say much for AM, or your opinion of him, does it?
He was a friggin side note. He is not a fit. Fitz is the same type of player. I got ridiculed on this board for saying fitz was a 3. He sure was a great fit wasn’t he? Does Archie need shooter? Yes he does but let’s not act like he was being recruited to be a wing. He is supposed to fill a spot at the 4. A post player first.
What about a Juco Guy? There is a guy from Fort Wayne named Sydney Curry. He’s 6”8 255. Plays at John Logan. #9 ranked Juco. Has an offer from Kansas, Ole Miss, Seton Hall, and Texas A&M. But I don’t know how many spots those guys have left?
Well, then I think you've nailed why we didn't get him (he's not a post), but my question remains: why were we recruiting him? He's not a post, nor was Fitz, nor did Kaufman want to be. I disagree with you, otherwise we should've not had an offer out to him and be chasing the next TJD or Race. I think our coaching staff wants to play a 4 out 1 in scheme... and that 1 will likely be Race or Dunscomb... maybe a 5th year Brunk.
I hope you are right. That’s exactly why we lost both. The kids today want that free flowing gunslinger offense. Archie sure haven’t shown that he will run that style. Is it personnel? Not sure. You do bring up a good point though(never thought of) about wanting to go that style. If we where then why where we showing Kaufman TJD tape? He clearly doesn’t want to be a full post player. We will see pretty soon.
If he were not a fit, I don't think Miller would have pursued him. While he was not the front line defensive solution IU still needs, Miller must have felt he was a fit for the future of the program.
I mean you don’t say no to a player like him(obviously). I’m not sure he’s a true front line type. Like Fk said above maybe Archie is trying to change the offensive style. Will be interesting and if true makes total sense.
You've said Archie very actively recruited a player who wasn’t a good fit. It makes no sense whatsoever. Now, you’re stating that you don’t say “no” to the bad fit guy, whom you never should’ve recruited. Got it.
Archie obviously saw a role for him for four years at IU. No he is not a prototypical front line player...particularly defensively and I doubt the offense is being restructured. Sometimes you just want a kid on your team.
We very much will need him, which is a huge indictment of Archie.......hope he wants to come back.
We need an athletic 6'8" type that can hit a wide open 15' and is willing to play some D. I say athletic because LD, although he has some nice attributes, offers no rim protection and little quickness.
I think we'll need an undergrad transfer rather than a grad transfer. Although grad transfer wings are plentiful, decent 4s & 5s are not. And CAM has not shown the ability or the inclination to fight the UKs and the UNCs for the few that are available. On the other hand, if the NCAA waives the 1 yr sit out rule, there should be options available.
As I've said before, I think the claim of showing TK tape of TJD was misunderstood by TK, or just a convenient excuse. I don't believe the coaching staff was showing tape of TJD and meaning "this is how we want you to play". I think they were showing him tape largely because we haven't had anyone under CAM who played successfully on the wing as a 3-4, and TJD is our biggest success story and they wanted to tout that. I think their intent was "Look, here's an IN kid ranked similarly to you who has come to IU and is excelling and putting himself in position to be an NBA lottery pick!" Next year we have Race and Dunscomb, and those guys will fill the role TJD does this year, so it's inherently different. Maybe they were reluctant to go back to guys like OG or Watford, but that's more how he sees himself and would have been better fits. Heck, he mentioned Vince Edwards and Robbie Hummel, and those guys are as old as OG and Wat, but maybe they didn't want to tout guys they didn't coach. I think that was just TK's excuse for why he didn't come and he felt was an easier let down than "I just didn't vibe with the staff or roster as well at IU as I did at PU." Maybe he did want to study Engineering. Personally, I really wonder if there was anything to the claims some made months ago saying Kaufman would never play with Lander. Maybe we sealed our fate with TK when we took Lander?
Miller I think felt overlooked with all the TK love. But, the recruitment of both those kids tells me CAM is considering and open to a more open 4 out 1 in offense.
Could be all those points but Kaufman is pretty intelligent from all accounts. I’m thinking he just didn’t see the offensive fit. We haven’t had a guy to showcase at the 3-4 yet. Hopefully Hunter is that guy. As for Miller, Creighton was on him early. We came in late. I think that and with their offensive scheme was the kicker.
We "come in late" on a lot of recruits. A lot of top 50 types. We've never gotten of those types under CAM. And not many in the 51-100 range.
The only guys I can think of that we got where we truly 'came in late' were Jake Forrester & Franklin. In Franklin's case, as I recall, we prioritized Newman, and strung Franklin along without a lot of contact. And were surprised when he committed. We also weren't real early on Geronimo, as I recall. He's the one guy I remember that we weren't on real early who was impressed enough by an Indiana offer and visit to sign quickly. Damezi might be in that category as well.
We didn't offer Galloway & Leal early, but we were always in contact.
I don't think Archie is enough of a closer to come in late very often and come away with a commitment, even when we appear to be the highest-profile offer. With Archie we have to get engaged with a prospect and date for a year or two........even then we're getting left at the alter.
Yes - even when we recruit a kid for a long stretch, IU is usually down the list of consideration and we’ve failed there miserably.
Meh we run the same basic stuff as everyone else, there's nothing special or lacking, just geared recently to personnel.
TK wants to play three, Painter lied to him and said he would. He will of course explain that 3 and 4 in his system is the same (it's not) and though Trey will have to guard opposing fours, he's still a three. That's what most coaches do. All 5s want to be 4s, 4's want to play 3.. It's not working out that way for Dawson Garcia, or Trendon Watford, who will both spend some time guarding fives this year .. but yea, Watford is a still a 3.. sure....
Miller sold him on being a stretch four, which is exactly what he is. AM needs to lie better, he doesn't need to be blatantly orange about it and claim something as false as "positionless basketball", but he just may not have enough of that slimey used car salesman personality all good recruiters have....
fwiw - IU doesn't have the cred currently to expect top 50 guys to commit to coming off the bench for two years, which would have been the case with both Miller and Kauffman. We're not UNC. Miller will start at day one for Creighton. Trey probably thinks he will... he'll be coming off the bench, for at least a year and will never start at three.
Last edited:
So TK was just hoodwinked? He is a Boiler because Painter is a better liar than Miller? That’s pretty disrespectful to TK. I think he is much smarter than that.
He sure did tell him he’s a 3. He’s not. He’s a classic stretch 4. Him and Miller will get torched trying to guard a 3. We have 2 guys right now who could.
He wanted to play right away and he wanted to play three. He wouldn't do either at IU, and he won't do it at Purdue either. One coach showed him film of fours and how they are used, the other said "sure, sign here".
Lol at Painter lying to Trey. That’s laughable. He wouldn’t have come off bench at IU for 2 years either. Perhaps Archie and company shouldn’t have used TJD as a comparison since their games aren’t remotely close.
Similar threads
