Newman to PU

[T.M.P.]

They are the only guidelines that we as fans have, plus Snow admitted that they are based off of NBA potential...so an athletic freak who is an okay basketball player will be ranked higher than a basketball player that's not an athletic freak.

It also doesn't factor in fit, leadership?? Coachability?? Team comradery??

Dakich had an interesting tidbit the other day. He bragged about how he won more in his first five year than Bowling Green ever did and thought he needed to upgrade his talent, particularly get more athletic, so he took chances on guys who were rated higher that were absolute clowns, we're hard to coach and had outsiders sabotaging what he was trying to do with the team.

I totally get using them for expectations (which is why I loved your concept of including draft projections along with rankings so if a Trey Burke came back for his junior year, he's weighted as a five or four star vs the lowly three star that the 'rankings' had him... because he is an undersized shooting guard with average athleticism).

Arguing over Newman and Franklin because of ranking is silly. If Newman was 25th I'd understand the bellyache better.

These thinly veiled shots about being 'disappointed' is either an idiotic take from a moron who can't count to 13 (or more specifically 3, as in there are 3 spots right now) or a jilted Alford lover who still has sour grapes just trying to stir up s$#t.

Are we disappointed that we recinded Aaron Henry's offer and lost him to MSU after Damezi accepted? Let's just take 7 every class as it will work itself out.

76% ... at last count using ranking vs PER. Meaning 76% of recruits will have an average PER within 3(+/-) points, of their ranking, 12% will be below, 12% above. Though not full proof, that's still a pretty good prediction model. fwiw - accuracy increases with guard and wings, and decreases with forwards and posts which points to the rankings being as you say based on pro potential as height is a wanted trait. Also, the higher the ranking the more accuracy.

 

[Frosty83]

76% ... at last count using ranking vs PER. Meaning 76% of recruits will have an average PER within 4(+/-) points, of their ranking, 12% will be below, 12% above. Though not full proof, that's still a pretty good prediction model. fwiw - accuracy increases with guard and wings, and decreases with forwards and posts which points to the rankings being as you say based on pro potential as height is a wanted trait. Also, the higher the ranking the more accuracy.

Source?

 

[TommyCracker]

While I realize you're joking, I don't mind the idea of taking a 4-5 man class every year, and nudging out the door those who can't hack it. That influx, along with a (hopefully) healthy amount of early entries should get us to where we need to be.

I think it's healthy attrition.

Not me.

The best teams are the ones with the best upperclassmen. So recruiting the right guys from the 25 to 150 spots while adding a one and done (maybe one a year) is ideally what I'd prefer.

Archie very obviously like to play very physical...so having older, physically developed players is a huge advantage. Plus he also seems to value experience (at least he mentions it every other interview).

Look at your typical Kansas teams. Typically one five star freshman surrounded by great, solid upperclassmen. Self has been playing the transfer market lately which gives him very talented second tier players who are experienced. I think it's pretty smart of him.

Again the best teams typically have the best upperclassmen in college.

Constantly being young isn't sustainable, never mind the potential recruiting landmines that comes with forced attrition (Crean says hello after f#$king over Buss Patterson out of Indy and to lesser point, but Dakich took a very public exception to, Matt Roth).

 

[T.M.P.]

Source?

Math.

 

[Frosty83]

Math.

You have too much free time Thanks for the numbers!

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

Not me.

The best teams are the ones with the best upperclassmen. So recruiting the right guys from the 25 to 150 spots while adding a one and done (maybe one a year) is ideally what I'd prefer.

Archie very obviously like to play very physical...so having older, physically developed players is a huge advantage. Plus he also seems to value experience (at least he mentions it every other interview).

Look at your typical Kansas teams. Typically one five star freshman surrounded by great, solid upperclassmen. Self has been playing the transfer market lately which gives him very talented second tier players who are experienced. I think it's pretty smart of him.

Again the best teams typically have the best upperclassmen in college.

Constantly being young isn't sustainable, never mind the potential recruiting landmines that comes with forced attrition (Crean says hello after f#$king over Buss Patterson out of Indy and to lesser point, but Dakich took a very public exception to, Matt Roth).

Kansas is the perfect example. They can develop upperclassmen like Graham, Mason, Mychailuk and Vick.

But Self also isn't shy about shoving people out the door, when the writing is on the wall. He usually has about one players who falls in that category every year.

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

 

[IndianaHoops]

Kansas is the perfect example. They can develop upperclassmen like Graham, Mason, Mychailuk and Vick.

But Self also isn't shy about shoving people out the door, when the writing is on the wall. He usually has about one players who falls in that category every year.

The two aren't mutually exclusive.

That’s basically what Crean tried to do. Worked great.....

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

That’s basically what Crean tried to do. Worked great.....

Yeah but Crean was squeezing out dog crap, to make room for shit.

I'm talking about doing it with talent.

 

[ufo33]

The rankings are a crap shoot above 80 or 100. The top 30 are usually very good players. Perea was an exception based on him being an athletic freak, but an unskilled basketball player. Rankings also do not usually take into consideration their intangibles, leadership, drive, effort, being a good teammate, and their ability to easily to coach up and take constructive criticism, and their overall character.

 

[IndianaHoops]

Yeah but Crean was squeezing out dog crap, to make room for shit.

I'm talking about doing it with talent.

Yeah, IU isn’t KU, Duke, or UK right now. And that’s the only ones that bring in that kind of talent every year.

 

[ufo33]

Yeah but Crean was squeezing out dog crap, to make room for shit.

I'm talking about doing it with talent.

Crean was an inconsistent recruiter that brought in low talent players from all over the country instead recruiting of in-state studs.

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

Yeah, IU isn’t KU, Duke, or UK right now. And that’s the only ones that bring in that kind of talent every year.

Not really. Arizona, MSU, and even Shaka at Texas have recruited on par with KU in recent years.

If you don't believe we should recruit like a Top 6 team, that's fine. But I think of IU as Blue Blood. Maybe you don't.

 

[IndianaHoops]

Not really. Arizona, MSU, and even Shaka at Texas have recruited on par with KU in recent years.

If you don't believe we should recruit like a Top 6 team, that's fine. But I think of IU as Blue Blood. Maybe you don't.

MSU rarely has transfers.

Arizona hasn’t done shit. A couple elite 8s in 10 years?

Has Texas made the NCAA with Shaka yet?

 

[mike41703]

They are correct more often than not. If they weren't boards like this wouldn't exist and wouldn't be as popular.

Haarms was nearly 300

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

Yeah but Crean was squeezing out dog crap, to make room for shit.

I'm talking about doing it with talent.

Yeah, IU isn’t KU, Duke, or UK right now. And that’s the only ones that bring in that kind of talent every year.

MSU rarely has transfers.

Arizona hasn’t done shit. A couple elite 8s in 10 years?

Has Texas made the NCAA with Shaka yet?

Point being that you don't have to bring in Duke/ UK level talent to justify healthy roster turnover.

You acting like there isn't a sizable gap between the talent Crean brought it and that of UK/ KU/ Duke was disingenuous.

A lot of teams live in that gap, I'd think most of us would want to live in the gap (but closer to the UK/ Duke end).

 

[fpeaugh]

MSU rarely has transfers.

Arizona hasn’t done shit. A couple elite 8s in 10 years?

Has Texas made the NCAA with Shaka yet?

And what have we done in that timeframe?

Just keep our heads down and power on? Excuse the rational ones knowing better

 

[IndianaHoops]

And what have we done in that timeframe?

Just keep our heads down and power on? Excuse the rational ones knowing better

Context is key when replying to a post.

How’s Brad doing?

 

[IndianaHoops]

Point being that you don't have to bring in Duke/ UK level talent to justify healthy roster turnover.

You acting like there isn't a sizable gap between the talent Crean brought it and that of UK/ KU/ Duke was disingenuous.

A lot of teams live in that gap, I'd think most of us would want to live in the gap (but closer to the UK/ Duke end).

Which is it, IU is a blue blood like Duke, UK, and Kansas and brings in 4-5 each year and creans kids or they live in the “gap”?

 

[13thman]

Purdue and Maryland are both going with quick scoring point guards and big lumbering centers. Both look for classic shooters as wings.

Michigan, Michigan State and Indiana are recruiting faciliator point guards with mobile forwards who can shoot, while using wings and combo guards to slash.

I see these as differing styles of play although i think msu is the most balanced of the 5 mentioned schools.

If Franklin ends up anything like Jae'shon Tate I will be happy.

As some have mentioned, both are good solid prospects and Im glad they have stayed in state. We will see how things play out with each respective program. We need to trust the style of play that Archie employs on both offense and defense as the superior opportunity to utilize the talent being recruited.

I would have loved to read what a lot of current posters would have said in the 88-89 preseason. Way way too much focus on recruiting rankings and paper tigers around here.

You're the first that I've heard bring up Tate. If that is a good comparison, then I'll be happy as well.

 

[fpeaugh]

Context is key when replying to a post.

How’s Brad doing?

Pretty darn well. We should have hired him in 2011.

 

[IndianaHoops]

Pretty darn well. We should have hired him in 2011.

Good for him....

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

Which is it, IU is a blue blood like Duke, UK, and Kansas and brings in 4-5 each year and creans kids or they live in the “gap”?

I don't expect us to recruit like Duke or UK. As I said, no other program, including Kansas, does that.

But "Creaning" or forcing kids out is not abnormal and happens with programs that aren't UK/ Duke.

Don't be purposely dense. Not a good look...

 

[IndianaHoops]

I don't expect us to recruit like Duke or UK. As I said, no other program, including Kansas, does that.

But "Creaning" or forcing kids out is not abnormal and happens with programs that aren't UK/ Duke.

Don't be purposely dense. Not a good look...

So how do we bring in 4-5 every year?

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

So how do we bring in 4-5 every year?

By recruiting and signing 4-5 players every year. Some players will leave early to make room, others will be shown the door to make room.

Read my original post.

 

[IndianaHoops]

By recruiting and signing 4-5 players every year. Some players will leave early to make room, others will be shown the door to make room.

Read my original post.

“some players will leave”....... lol

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

“some players will leave”....... lol

Yeah. As in go play professionally. Do you expect we wont have any pros?

 

[IndianaHoops]

Yeah. As in go play professionally. Do you expect we wont have any pros?

lol......and not be Duke, UK, etc?

Whatever makes you happy kid.......

 

[IDontWannaLargeFarva]

lol......and not be Duke, UK, etc?

Whatever makes you happy kid.......

I'm struggling with your point of view here.

Conservatively. If we have one early NBA draft entry every 2 years in the Miller era and combine that with a player being shown the door every other year because they'll get more PT somewhere else.. That already puts us at 17 hypothetical scholarships.

That puts us at over 4 players per recruiting class (or incoming transfers).

Are you really not following this?

 

[fpeaugh]

lol......and not be Duke, UK, etc?

Whatever makes you happy kid.......

You’re lost man. Other schools besides UK and Duke have plenty of kids leave early. Every year over half of the NBA draftees are underclassmen. They don’t all come from 2 schools. You really need to look outside of IU a little bit.

 

[fpeaugh]

If we don’t have at least a couple players leaving early every year (don’t have to be one and dones) we’re not going to be the successful program we all want to be. It’s been proven for years.

 

[IndianaHoops]

If we don’t have at least a couple players leaving early every year (don’t have to be one and dones) we’re not going to be the successful program we all want to be. It’s been proven for years.

You’re lost man. Other schools besides UK and Duke have plenty of kids leave early. Every year over half of the NBA draftees are underclassmen. They don’t all come from 2 schools. You really need to look outside of IU a little bit.

He wants classes of 4 or 5 every year and basically Crean kids.

That bad.

 

[IndianaHoops]

I'm struggling with your point of view here.

Conservatively. If we have one early NBA draft entry every 2 years in the Miller era and combine that with a player being shown the door every other year because they'll get more PT somewhere else.. That already puts us at 17 hypothetical scholarships.

That puts us at over 4 players per recruiting class (or incoming transfers).

Are you really not following this?

Look, there is simply no way to bring in 4-5 new kids every year (freshmen) and cut kids.

Crean tried this already

 

[mobilehoosier]

Pretty sure Newman got what he wanted and Franklin got what he wanted . Two good ballers going at it for a while. I like it.
Go Hoosiers!

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

Pretty darn well. We should have hired him in 2011.

I should have bought Apple stock in the 80's.

 

[fpeaugh]

I should have bought Apple stock in the 80's.

Some people did. Just like some of us were calling for Brad in 2011. It wasn’t near as hard to predict as Apple stock. The guy went to back to back championships at Butler while Crean was finishing dead last in the Big Ten in year 3. It shouldn’t have been that hard to see.

 

[klize17]

Some people did. Just like some of us were calling for Brad in 2011. It wasn’t near as hard to predict as Apple stock. The guy went to back to back championships at Butler while Crean was finishing dead last in the Big Ten in year 3. It shouldn’t have been that hard to see.

Don’t you ever get tired of spewing the same shit over and over and over?

 

[HoosierJimbo89]

Some people did. Just like some of us were calling for Brad in 2011. It wasn’t near as hard to predict as Apple stock. The guy went to back to back championships at Butler while Crean was finishing dead last in the Big Ten in year 3. It shouldn’t have been that hard to see.

That ship has sailed: move on.

 

[TR32]

They are correct more often than not. If they weren't boards like this wouldn't exist and wouldn't be as popular.

This board existed before the player rankings.

 

[TR32]

I don't mind the idea of taking a 4-5 man class every year, and nudging out the door those who can't hack it. That influx, along with a (hopefully) healthy amount of early entries should get us to where we need to be.

I think it's healthy attrition.

Wow, I sure don't agree with that at all. I really think chemistry is better with trust and, of course, togetherness. You just can't have that when the bench is wondering if they will even be on the team next year. It is just human nature.

 

[TR32]

76% ... at last count using ranking vs PER. Meaning 76% of recruits will have an average PER within 3(+/-) points, of their ranking, 12% will be below, 12% above. Though not full proof, that's still a pretty good prediction model. fwiw - accuracy increases with guard and wings, and decreases with forwards and posts which points to the rankings being as you say based on pro potential as height is a wanted trait. Also, the higher the ranking the more accuracy.

Player efficiency rating doesn't use defensive stats, am I right about that?