ADVERTISEMENT

Jon Rothstein, CBSSports.com says his pick for

Point being, the computer rankings mean zero...

also try explaining SMU at 33 overall (15 spots higher than us) despite losing to us head to head and SMU's 0-4 record vs the top 50 compared to our 3-3 top 50 record.

Can go on and on with these comparisons...

your IU is not a good team b/c the computers say so logic is way off base.
 
Yesterday (before the game), people were complaining that we were tied for fifth in the league. Another (more accurate) way to have looked at it was we were 1/2 game out of first. Now I'm not one who is going to say "What about now that we're tied for first in the league?" because it's to early to talk about that. Four games in is not the time to crow about being tied for first unless the teams you've beaten are others that are tied for first. It's also not the time to despair about being tied for fifth because we hadn't yet played a game that enabled us to be tied for first! Being balanced in thinking about this team is something that few people here seem to be capable of.

Yes, we are winning games we are supposed to win. But you left out that we are also winning some games we are NOT supposed to win. SMU, Butler, and OSU were all ranked when we beat them. We've lost one game we were not expected to lose, but have beaten everyone else we were expected to beat - AND beat three teams in the top 25.

Now, no one is going to compare this team to the 75-76 squad, but let's at least be honest and say that winning more than we are expected to win is a good thing.
 
Oh I get it ..

you're far better at accessing the basketball proficiency of 340+ teams with your biased perception and arbitrary subjectivity. Do you have a web site used by the tourney committee, and most NCAA coaches, too.

Link?







This post was edited on 1/14 6:47 PM by T.M.P.
 
We as fans are to close to the situation

and can't be objective but the national people can be objective because they have no emotional investmet.
 
Very well said!

Those are the details that many want to sweep under the rug...if they notice them at all.
 
Might as well not play the game

instead just have the computers determine the outcome. I am so tired of the computer geeks that care more about what a computer says than actually watch the game and have an opinon of their own. It is like all these guys who only care about stats especially in baseball and determine everything by stats instead of what they actually see on the field.
 
Hoe many of our wins were we the underdog?

I found the info.... we have won 4 games as Vegas dogs +1 SMU, +3.5 BU, +4 NU, +2 OSU. The only loss as a favorite was EMU

This post was edited on 1/14 5:39 PM by missionale

vegas baby
 
I though DD didn't know anything about hoops?

When he hammered IU/TC he was a washed up know-nothing coach...I guess he must have attended a coaching clinic in the last 3 months
 
No lets's let the sportswriter above judge who won..

considering he's what you call objective. lmao!

Cognitive dissonance - applaud and agree with the arbitrary opinion of a beat writer because you agree with it, but deny the proven mathematical analysis of site that is used by most coaches in the NCAA because you don't and then call an opinion vs an analysis "objective"... please quit, I'm gonna piss myself laughing so hard.

You're just not very bright or aware are you? Do you even know what objective means?














This post was edited on 1/14 7:53 PM by T.M.P.
 
I go by what i see

i don't came what this sportswriter really thinks but he does watch alot more basketball than we do because he is paid to do so. I have seen hm alot on CBSsports alot and he generally is a very fair person who really knows th elandscape of college basketball. I also rather people form there own opinon in what they actually see for themselves rather than base every thing on stats which can be manipulated any way you want them
 
are you implying the computer rankings are manipulated

to purposely make IU look bad?

The reality is that they don't, and all teems are evaluated under the same formula.

It's not smart to rely entirely on computer rankings. It's also really dumb to disregard them wholesale. You should look at a few of the computer rankings, read their approaches so you understand them, and then mix that with experts'opinions and what you see yourself.
Posted from Rivals Mobile
 
I heard from a quality source that both Sagarin and

Kenpom have Tom Crean Hater algorithms.. lol ..

He doesn't understand what the numbers represent or how to interpret them. Plus, he lacks the self awareness to understand just how little his perspective means. So, they're probably like magic or another person's religion to him. Maybe doing a few cave paintings will help explain?



















This post was edited on 1/14 9:39 PM by T.M.P.
 
I am not really talking about rankings

in general but just stats overall when a person is deciding whether they think a team or player is good. When deciding if I think a team is a good team I rather go by the eye test rather than just look at some random numbers because I like to make my own decisions.
 
Yep.

For me, they've lost one game I expected they would win (EWU) and won 2 games I thought they may not win (Butler and Nebraska) although I thought there was a good chance they would get 1 of the 2.

They are right on schedule IMO. IF they go 4-2 over the next stretch, I will put some credence into Rothstein's thinking. But it is too early as I don't really think they've done anything extremely noteworthy yet.
 
Re: Here's my take


Many of the team projections for this year were out before most of the negatives occurred. If you look at his recruiting over a period of more than one year, it's been one of the best in the nation. We lost bigs to the draft, not because they were NBA ready, but rather because they saw weakness in their particular draft, and the NBA'ers draft on potential when it comes to some bigs, particularly in a year where the draft is admittedly weak. Understand that there is a two round NBA draft every year regardless of talent available.

Crean admits he didn't see the debacle coming with Fischer leaving, however I don't recall anyone on this site seeing or predicting it either.

Under the circumstances, I think the team has done very well this year to date. Crean, to his credit, took some responsibility for some of the off the court stuff, however who is it that stands up and takes any of the credit for the non-athletes who get into similar problems on campus.
 
"Under the circumstances"

Every team is facing the same circumstances - the world of college basketball is not conspiring against IU and CTC.

Every team faced the same possibility of losing their big men to the same exact weak NBA draft class. Most major conference teams are able to keep their rosters well stocked with 4-5 serviceable big men every year. Why is the IU situation somehow special in this regard?

CTC has failed to field a complete team - unlike the other highest-paid coaches.

So yes, under the circumstances and compared to low expectations, CTC has the team performing well (so far). You know which coaches don't require that qualifier? Guess which coaches never have pre-season rankings in the bottom 1/4 of their conference? Basically all of the coaches in CTC's salary peer group.

Also, the athletes have an entire coaching staff and the accompanying army of AD trainers, staff, and tutors looking out for their well-being on top of the resources/staff available to the non-athletes. It's the coaches' responsibility to field a team - which includes keeping them safe, healthy, out of legal trouble, and academically eligible. I'm sure CTC even goes into the homes of his recruits and tells their parents that he'll take care of their children.
 
Re: And that is Crean's fault how?

For three years, Peter Jurkin had a scholarship. Now Jeremiah April has a scholarship. Maybe that scholarship should be being used for someone who could actually play?
 
He is a certifiable fool if IU is the most impressive team he has watched

this season.

I would disregard his opinions sight unseen from here on out.
 
The same could.....


said for any school with 13 scholarship players and a rotation playing 10 or less. They all have a few players waiting to see the floor. Tell us how IU is terribly different. We understand we could have better bigs, however there will still be 3-4 guys keeping the end of the bench warm,....some of them may well be 7'0" projects.
 
Re: He is a certifiable fool if IU is the most impressive team he has watched

I don't think he is saying IU is the most impressive team he has watched. I think he is saying he is impressed with IU and Crean because nobody thought they would be this good with the lineup they were projected to have.
 
Re: He is a certifiable fool if IU is the most impressive team he has watched

I don't think he is saying IU is the most impressive team he has watched. I think he is saying he is impressed with IU and Crean because nobody thought they would be this good with the lineup they were projected to have.
 
Re: That's Fine for teams in a position to be able to do that


But, we were beforel losing Cody, Fischer, and Vonleh, all who could have been here this year. We got Fischer because everyone, including Fischer, knew Cody was leaving after two years.

Fischer was not satisfied with IU for whatever reason and surprised everyone by leaving after one semester. Vonleh was drafted on potential and that may turn out to be the worst thing he could have done. Charlotte has to make a big decision going into Vonleh's third year. He has done little to date to make that decision an easy one. Cody was picked up for his third year, but they did not pick up the fourth as of yet.

Calipari says he was surprised by kids who stayed this year, so why are some adamant that Crean should have known a year ahead of time about kids who would leave or stay, with the exception of Cody?
This post was edited on 1/17 4:12 PM by outanames
 
Re: "Under the circumstances"

Most teams did not start from scratch 6-7 years ago. We're not talking "big men", but rather a big man. We have as many 6'7"'s as anyone. Without looking it up, give me a few names of serviceable #5's backing up starting #5's among the elite schools, excluding Kentucky. Having to play 6-7 minutes as a back-up is a lot different than having to play 32-33 minutes.

Very few schools can lose their starting #5 big without noticeable decline in team ability. We've lost ours each of the last two years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

iubhounds

IU's Offense

Replies
7
Views
509
TheHoosier.com IU Hoop Forum
Victorbmyboy
Victorbmyboy
B

Hood-Schifino

Replies
17
Views
659
Premium IU Hoop Forum
Willdog7
W
B

Time for historical redemption vs MSU

Replies
30
Views
912
Premium IU Football Forum
swman
S
N

Thoughts after 2 exhibition games

Replies
41
Views
4K
TheHoosier.com IU Hoop Forum
mohoosier
mohoosier
M

Injuries

Replies
2
Views
442
TheHoosier.com IU Hoop Forum
T.M.P.
T.M.P.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back