2012-2013 NCAA Basketball thread

[RockRaines]

Didn't you guys want to see more growth out of Zeller? Didn't you want Watford to play better this year and not regress? Didn't you want Hulls to learn how to play defense for one game in 4 years at IU?

 

As an equal opportunity hater, i'm just as unimpressed with Groce's ability to coach. I think Henry is the only guy that got better as the season went along. Everyone else has maintained (Richardson, Griffey, Abrams, Egwu) or regressed (Paul, Bertrand).

He's not even in the NPOY conversation, some would call that a disappointment.

[Dick Allen]

Nice retort.

 

Show me an example. Is Zeller better this year than last year? Hulls? Wafford? How about Yogi from the non conference to the conference season?

 

Crean's accomplishments have come from having a top 50 all time NBA player and 2 National Player of the Year nominees on the same team. If you're seriously suggesting it's because of his ability to coach em up, you have not been paying attention.

 

I'm not at all suggesting he can't coach - he's been a coach at two high level D1 schools, obviously he can to some degree. I'm just saying he's not known for his coaching and hasn't really shown the ability to out coach some of the other really good coaches in the league to this point.

He just won the Big Ten. The Indiana roster is his responsibility. I'm no Indiana fan, and Crean has always seemed a little odd to me, but coaches that win, whether they are known to be the greatest at designing out of bounds plays or not, are doing something right. Would Marquette rather have had Crean be known as a better Xs and Os guy and not land Wade? Getting Wade is part of his job. This year he won the Big Ten. All the other stuff is nitpicking. Would you rather have a guy considered a better game coach and come in 5th? As long as he's doing it cleanly, I don't see how Crean, if he keeps landing these recruits, is not worth his weight in gold.

[He_Gawn]

Didn't you guys want to see more growth out of Zeller? Didn't you want Watford to play better this year and not regress? Didn't you want Hulls to learn how to play defense for one game in 4 years at IU?

 

As an equal opportunity hater, i'm just as unimpressed with Groce's ability to coach. I think Henry is the only guy that got better as the season went along. Everyone else has maintained (Richardson, Griffey, Abrams, Egwu) or regressed (Paul, Bertrand).

 

 

Seems to me that you're just looking at stats and saying "oh, he regressed from last year". It's called TALENT INFLUX. So because Watford doesn't take over games like he used too, he regressed? Um no, it's because Zeller and Oladipo are two of the top players in country. Who does IU go to when they need something? Those two. Watford, Hulls, and Sheehey fill their role extremely well because they don't have to "get theirs" to be happy. Which is why Indiana is one of the top 2-3 TEAMS in the country.

 

As for Hulls, he's one of the smartest defenders on the team. He definitely has his limitations. I mean, look at him. Did you expect him to suddenly grow some length, height, and improve 10" on his vertical? Come on man.

[Heads22]

That link said Indiana's student section was 7,800.

[He_Gawn]

He just won the Big Ten. The Indiana roster is his responsibility. I'm no Indiana fan, and Crean has always seemed a little odd to me, but coaches that win, whether they are known to be the greatest at designing out of bounds plays or not, are doing something right. Would Marquette rather have had Crean be known as a better Xs and Os guy and not land Wade? Getting Wade is part of his job. This year he won the Big Ten. All the other stuff is nitpicking. Would you rather have a guy considered a better game coach and come in 5th? As long as he's doing it cleanly, I don't see how Crean, if he keeps landing these recruits, is not worth his weight in gold.

 

Logic has entered the thread.

 

 

Amazingly, recruiting IS part of the coaching job.

[Jenksismyhero]

And I'll add the player development isn't the only thing I question about Crean. I've mentioned his substitution patterns, which leads me to believe that he doesn't really read the momentum of games properly (often pulling the gun too early or waiting too long). And this team still doesn't run a great half court game. I get that they're at their best when they run and gun, but in the tournament that might come back to bite them.

 

Again, equally hating on Groce, he has the exact same problem. He lets negative runs go on for way too long, and even when his team is going 8-9 minutes without a bucket he rarely, if ever, calls a set play to try and manufacture points. I give Groce the benefit of the doubt though since i've had 4 years to see how weak minded/basketball stupid his players are (Paul in particular) . And you can almost see the line in games where Illinois' ability just stops and they can't do any better. Crean has better players that don't have the same limits.

[Jenksismyhero]

He just won the Big Ten. The Indiana roster is his responsibility. I'm no Indiana fan, and Crean has always seemed a little odd to me, but coaches that win, whether they are known to be the greatest at designing out of bounds plays or not, are doing something right. Would Marquette rather have had Crean be known as a better Xs and Os guy and not land Wade? Getting Wade is part of his job. This year he won the Big Ten. All the other stuff is nitpicking. Would you rather have a guy considered a better game coach and come in 5th? As long as he's doing it cleanly, I don't see how Crean, if he keeps landing these recruits, is not worth his weight in gold.

 

But i'm hearing all this crap about Indiana being "back." Well, they're back to competing and recruiting with other teams on the same level. So yes, talent helps, but he's not going to have 2 national player of the year candidates on the same team again. So his coaching is going to come up at some point in the future, with or without talent. You know who else always has a ton of talent? Rick Barnes. He's about to be unemployed.

 

And i've said about 5 times I give Crean all the credit in the world for his recruiting successes. He's obviously very good at that and that's 75% of being successful in college basketball. But i'm arguing he's still limited and Indiana might be hurt for it going forward. As always, we shall see.

[RockRaines]

Logic has entered the thread.

 

 

Amazingly, recruiting IS part of the coaching job.

And with you logic left. Where is the post questioning his recruiting talents? Clearly recruiting is what just got him a conference title, nobody can debate that at all. I think it's funny how much he is defended on this site when your own fans are skewering him on your board weekly for the exact same reasons we are being critical. I still have yet to see why you think he's one of the best player development coaches in the country.

[Jenksismyhero]

Seems to me that you're just looking at stats and saying "oh, he regressed from last year". It's called TALENT INFLUX. So because Watford doesn't take over games like he used too, he regressed? Um no, it's because Zeller and Oladipo are two of the top players in country. Who does IU go to when they need something? Those two. Watford, Hulls, and Sheehey fill their role extremely well because they don't have to "get theirs" to be happy. Which is why Indiana is one of the top 2-3 TEAMS in the country.

 

As for Hulls, he's one of the smartest defenders on the team. He definitely has his limitations. I mean, look at him. Did you expect him to suddenly grow some length, height, and improve 10" on his vertical? Come on man.

 

I haven't looked at the stats at all. I've watched a lot of big ten games and I talk to my indiana friends who agree with me. As to Watford, he was terrible for the majority of the year. It's not that he didn't get the number of shots, it's that he sucked and never fit into the flow of the game. That's regression in my book.

 

Look, I get it. You don't want people talking bad about your coach/program. But i'm not the first or last person to question Crean's coaching ability.

[Balta1701]

But i'm not the first or last person to question Crean's coaching ability.

You say that as though it proves anything. I think Phil Jackson became too wedded to his triangle offense format and Thibs rides his starters too hard.

[ZoomSlowik]

Sorry, I didn't think you deserved a retort. If you can't see improvement, then you don't want to see it, period.

 

Oladipo went from nothing to POY candidate. Zellers numbers are up this year, finishes better with contact. Watford? Did you see him his freshman/sophomore years? Same with Hulls. You don't think Hulls has improved since he got here? LOL... Sheehey is one of the best 6th man in the conference. Yogi from the non-conference season to now? Have you watched IU? He runs the best offense in the country to perfection.

 

I mean, this argument is a moot point because you don't like Crean.

 

You can't turn every single player you recruit into an All-American (evidently like all the other coaches can, right?). Players peak, some early, some late. If you can't see that Indiana has gotten better since Crean arrived, you're helpless.

 

A lot of those are terrible examples. Oladipo okay, the rest haven't exactly made the leap.

 

Zeller averaged about 16-7 on 62% shooting as a freshman. This year he's averaging 17-8 on 57% shooting. WOW, HUGE difference! One of the main strikes against his draft stock is that scouts don't think he improved his game much.

 

Watford's numbers have been fairly consistent since his freshman year.

 

Sr- 12-6, 43/82/48 shooting

Jr- 13-6, 42/81/44 shooting

So- 16-5, 42/84/38 shooting

Fr- 12-6, 38/80/32 shooting

 

Basically his 3-point shooting got better. Improved, but not exactly off the charts.

 

You can do the same thing with Hulls. He got more minutes and his shooting percentage went up from his freshman to sophomore years, but other than that his numbers have been virtually identical.

 

Sheehey, it's really hard to say how much he's improved the last few years given he's still a role player. He's solid, but doesn't strike me as a potential All-Conference guy with more PT.

 

Ferrell, way too early to say he's made massive improvements. He's still putting up single-digit point games a lot and isn't exactly putting up 7 assists a game. I suspect he'll be very good next year, but that'll have a lot to do with an increased role.

 

I wouldn't put those types of developments anywhere close to what Bo Ryan does on a regular basis at Wisconsin. You can't say I'm biased either, as a Northwestern fan I only hate God.

[farmteam]

That link said Indiana's student section was 7,800.

Oops, must have missed that.

 

Well there you go Rock. Assembly Hall holds 17,420 I think. So 7800 students, 9620 non-students.

[Dick Allen]

And with you logic left. Where is the post questioning his recruiting talents? Clearly recruiting is what just got him a conference title, nobody can debate that at all. I think it's funny how much he is defended on this site when your own fans are skewering him on your board weekly for the exact same reasons we are being critical. I still have yet to see why you think he's one of the best player development coaches in the country.

I think it's pretty safe to say recruiting gets every coach their titles. Nobody wins with crappy players.

[Jenksismyhero]

You say that as though it proves anything. I think Phil Jackson became too wedded to his triangle offense format and Thibs rides his starters too hard.

 

It doesn't prove it, but it discounts someone's assertion that you're totally wrong and illogical in having those opinions.

[Dick Allen]

A lot of those are terrible examples. Oladipo okay, the rest haven't exactly made the leap.

 

Zeller averaged about 16-7 on 62% shooting as a freshman. This year he's averaging 17-8 on 57% shooting. WOW, HUGE difference! One of the main strikes against his draft stock is that scouts don't think he improved his game much.

 

Watford's numbers have been fairly consistent since his freshman year.

 

Sr- 12-6, 43/82/48 shooting

Jr- 13-6, 42/81/44 shooting

So- 16-5, 42/84/38 shooting

Fr- 12-6, 38/80/32 shooting

 

Basically his 3-point shooting got better. Improved, but not exactly off the charts.

 

You can do the same thing with Hulls. He got more minutes and his shooting percentage went up from his freshman to sophomore years, but other than that his numbers have been virtually identical.

 

Sheehey, it's really hard to say how much he's improved the last few years given he's still a role player. He's solid, but doesn't strike me as a potential All-Conference guy with more PT.

 

Ferrell, way too early to say he's made massive improvements. He's still putting up single-digit point games a lot and isn't exactly putting up 7 assists a game. I suspect he'll be very good next year, but that'll have a lot to do with an increased role.

 

I wouldn't put those types of developments anywhere close to what Bo Ryan does on a regular basis at Wisconsin. You can't say I'm biased either, as a Northwestern fan I only hate God.

Like was mentioned earlier, sometimes numbers alone won't tell you how much a player has improved or "developed". When you start playing with better players, many times individual numbers will flatten out. It seems people don't want to grade Crean on wins and losses.

[ZoomSlowik]

Like was mentioned earlier, sometimes numbers alone won't tell you how much a player has improved or "developed". When you start playing with better players, many times individual numbers will flatten out. It seems people don't want to grade Crean on wins and losses.

 

Unless it's defense, improvement will generally show up in the stats. Production might dip with a better team, but you usually see it reflected elsewhere (putting up the same stats in fewer minutes for example, or better percentages and fewer turnovers while playing a similar role).

 

Also, I never argued that none of these guys got better at all. I'm saying that outside of Oladipo, they're pretty bad examples of why a guy is a great developer of talent. Rock can easily point to Evan Turner, Lenzelle Smith, Deshaun Thomas and a bunch of other comparable players. Back when people thought Bruce Weber was good, you could point to every player on the 2005 team improving greatly over the course of their career (okay, Dee Brown not so much). Badger could probably list 20 players that sucked for Wisconsin as freshmen but turned into All-Conference players.

 

Saying a bunch of names of players on a good team doesn't really help with evidence for great player development.

Edited March 11, 2013 by ZoomSlowik

[Dick Allen]

Unless it's defense, improvement will generally show up in the stats. Production might dip with a better team, but you usually see it reflected elsewhere in the percentages or in reduced turnovers.

 

Also, I never argued that none of these guys got better at all. I'm saying that outside of Oladipo, they're pretty bad examples of why a guy is a great developer of talent. Rock can easily point to Evan Turner, Lenzelle Smith, Deshaun Thomas and a bunch of other comparable players. Back when people thought Bruce Weber was good, you could point to every player on the 2005 team improving greatly over the course of their career (okay, Dee Brown not so much). Badger could probably list 20 players that sucked for Wisconsin as freshmen but turned into All-Conference players.

 

Saying a bunch of names of players on a good team doesn't really help with evidence for great player development.

The greatest player who ever lived had numbers that didn't drastically improve percentage-wise between his freshman and junior seasons. I wouldn't say Dean Smith was a horrible developer of talent. Indiana is hated. I get it. I don't like them either. But they won. They get the credit. People just sound like Cubs fans pointing out White Sox attendance when they want to discredit Crean. If I were an Indiana fan on here I would just tell all the haters, "you're right, he can't develop players and he's a horrible in game coach. Your guy is far better. Enjoy 5th place." He won the Big Ten. Just give him his due and move on. A college coach is the Coach, GM and Chairman of his team. For this season, up until now, Crean has been better than all the other Big Ten coaches if you base it on results.

[IlliniKrush]

Yeah, I don't have a problem with that rule (needing a student ID with a student ticket). You're right that that's what IU does. If that's all this was, then no problem. But hypothetically, a Michigan student wearing an Indiana shirt would be unacceptable? That just seems too...1984...for my tastes. Plus, if we didn't allow that, we would never get an aerial picture of a full Memorial Stadium, since they only take those when we play Ohio State so everyone is wearing red. Even half the student section wears Buckeye gear for those games. Here's to eternally hoping Hoosier football isn't such a doormat for much longer....

 

 

 

There's no group in the sense that not ALL of the students are in one section. It's confusing, because there is a large mass of students behind the left side basket, and on the nearside lower left level. That looks like our student section, because it's big enough to be one. But that's only a small percentage of all the student seats. The rest are up in the corners of the lower level where it seems the balcony is about the fall down on you, and then scattered all over the balcony itself.

 

The tickets do rotate every game. My freshman year (of my four years, that was by far our best team [the DJ White/Eric Gordon/Sampson's Debacle team]) I only had seats behind the basket or in that near lower level section for about 4-5 of the 15 or so home games. The rest were in random seats, or we didn't have tickets (that year, it was every student had tickets to every game except for two, which were randomly selected for each group of ticket holders). So yes, you don't have tickets to every game -- so, for the sake of this conversation let's say Assembly Hall has 10,000 students seats. There might be 12,000 student tickets, but 2,000 of them aren't there on any given night.

 

A quick Google search couldn't give me any specific numbers on the student section, but I know at least IU's are out there somewhere, and I assume other schools' are as well. I'll look more later.

 

EDIT: Looks like IU has 12,400 student tickets this year.

Thanks for the info. I wonder how many schools actually have a "wait list" for tickets/can't get every game.

 

It's a huge reason you have a great home court advantage, roughly half the place is students that are active. In the words of Dakich, "stand up old people."

[Jenksismyhero]

The greatest player who ever lived had numbers that didn't drastically improve percentage-wise between his freshman and junior seasons. I wouldn't say Dean Smith was a horrible developer of talent. Indiana is hated. I get it. I don't like them either. But they won. They get the credit. People just sound like Cubs fans pointing out White Sox attendance when they want to discredit Crean. If I were an Indiana fan on here I would just tell all the haters, "you're right, he can't develop players and he's a horrible in game coach. Your guy is far better. Enjoy 5th place." He won the Big Ten. Just give him his due and move on. A college coach is the Coach, GM and Chairman of his team. For this season, up until now, Crean has been better than all the other Big Ten coaches if you base it on results.

 

Which would be fine if we're talking about this season and this season alone. But we're not. We're talking about Crean's ability to sustain this success for multiple years into the future.

 

In 2005 I could have argued Illinois was going to be an annual big ten/national title contender. They had just gotten to the NC game and had a national coach of the year. Fool proof!

 

How'd that turn out?

Edited March 11, 2013 by Jenksismybitch

[RockRaines]

The greatest player who ever lived had numbers that didn't drastically improve percentage-wise between his freshman and junior seasons. I wouldn't say Dean Smith was a horrible developer of talent. Indiana is hated. I get it. I don't like them either. But they won. They get the credit. People just sound like Cubs fans pointing out White Sox attendance when they want to discredit Crean. If I were an Indiana fan on here I would just tell all the haters, "you're right, he can't develop players and he's a horrible in game coach. Your guy is far better. Enjoy 5th place." He won the Big Ten. Just give him his due and move on. A college coach is the Coach, GM and Chairman of his team. For this season, up until now, Crean has been better than all the other Big Ten coaches if you base it on results.

You are arguing a point with nobody. Slightly on topic but not really.

[RockRaines]

Oops, must have missed that.

 

Well there you go Rock. Assembly Hall holds 17,420 I think. So 7800 students, 9620 non-students.

Still fairly impressive. They make a lot less money on students so they are doing those kids a serious solid.

[Boogua]

The greatest player who ever lived had numbers that didn't drastically improve percentage-wise between his freshman and junior seasons. I wouldn't say Dean Smith was a horrible developer of talent. Indiana is hated. I get it. I don't like them either. But they won. They get the credit. People just sound like Cubs fans pointing out White Sox attendance when they want to discredit Crean. If I were an Indiana fan on here I would just tell all the haters, "you're right, he can't develop players and he's a horrible in game coach. Your guy is far better. Enjoy 5th place." He won the Big Ten. Just give him his due and move on. A college coach is the Coach, GM and Chairman of his team. For this season, up until now, Crean has been better than all the other Big Ten coaches if you base it on results.

Jordan's percentages did go up from his Freshman to Junior year. From 53.5% to 55.1% and he went from 13.5 PPG to 20.0 and 19.6 (on less minutes and better %s than the 20 PPG season). There was a pretty drastic improvement there. I don't think that's the best example.

 

The whole thing about Crean being a better coach than other Big Ten coaches because he won the conference is silly. His roster is clearly more talented (which I know is part of being a coach) than every other roster in the B1G. Because Valpo won the horizon league in 2011-2012 does that mean Bryce Drew is a better coach than Brad Stevens? You'll probably say he was for that season, but come on, that's silly.

[ZoomSlowik]

The greatest player who ever lived had numbers that didn't drastically improve percentage-wise between his freshman and junior seasons. I wouldn't say Dean Smith was a horrible developer of talent. Indiana is hated. I get it. I don't like them either. But they won. They get the credit. People just sound like Cubs fans pointing out White Sox attendance when they want to discredit Crean. If I were an Indiana fan on here I would just tell all the haters, "you're right, he can't develop players and he's a horrible in game coach. Your guy is far better. Enjoy 5th place." He won the Big Ten. Just give him his due and move on. A college coach is the Coach, GM and Chairman of his team. For this season, up until now, Crean has been better than all the other Big Ten coaches if you base it on results.

 

Where did I ever say Tom Crean was a horrible developer of talent? I'm saying that if you're going to argue that he's an ELITE developer of talent, you should probably have a few more examples of guys that got significantly better.

 

As I said, I don't really give two s***s about IU since Northwestern doesn't matter enough to have rivals in basketball. I'd be saying the same thing about a lot of guys.

[farmteam]

Thanks for the info. I wonder how many schools actually have a "wait list" for tickets/can't get every game.

 

It's a huge reason you have a great home court advantage, roughly half the place is students that are active. In the words of Dakich, "stand up old people."

It was always great when you would see an 80 year old husband and wife stand up and cheer with the students. I think we have the best homecourt advantage in the country, and there's no way that's biased. Regardless of where it ranks though, you're right -- when you simply have that many students in an arena it's going to get loud.

 

Still fairly impressive. They make a lot less money on students so they are doing those kids a serious solid.

When I was there student tickets were $15/game. Regular seats were 40-60 I think; not sure. I do appreciate that the administration makes such an effort to make sure that a lot of students get to go to a lot of games.

[RockRaines]

It was always great when you would see an 80 year old husband and wife stand up and cheer with the students. I think we have the best homecourt advantage in the country, and there's no way that's biased. Regardless of where it ranks though, you're right -- when you simply have that many students in an arena it's going to get loud.

 

 

When I was there student tickets were $15/game. Regular seats were 40-60 I think; not sure. I do appreciate that the administration makes such an effort to make sure that a lot of students get to go to a lot of games.

I've said many times I am jealous of that homecourt advantage. We have the largest stadium in the conference and the quietest fans. The games where this is no student section is about as loud as a 3rd tier HS game.