Perea + Davis = Cleveland State
- Thread starter feulner
- Start date
There's truth in this one. Crean did the right thing. You can't let this stuff slide. Hanner will be a major loss I think. That makes them razor thin up front. It all hangs on Bryant now.
Depends on how many commitments they can get.... If no one commits, then I would agree with you.
There's truth in this one. Crean did the right thing. You can't let this stuff slide. Hanner will be a major loss I think. That makes them razor thin up front. It all hangs on Bryant now.
Math, knowing Crean's history with discipline both at Marquette and IU, and his lack of it in most issues, I'd guess that someone higher up at IU informed Two Tone to do this. And it does open up a spot for Maker to come in for one semester.
Who here actually thought Perea did a good job last year? I'd say hardly anyone. The only downside to this is we're thin up front. Bryant was going to start day one. Holt was getting better and taking some minutes from Hanner. I think more of the weight is going to fall to Morgan and Holt which isn't a terrible thing.There's truth in this one. Crean did the right thing. You can't let this stuff slide. Hanner will be a major loss I think. That makes them razor thin up front. It all hangs on Bryant now.
I feel bad for the kids, but they were given second chances and blew them. It's their own fault for what happened. Crean finally, finally made the right decision.
I might be in the minority, but I think Maker is overrated. He's talented, yes, but there could be chemistry issues like when Vonleh was here knowing the kid is 100% a one and done. Seems like more hassle than he's worth.
Technically, Maker would be a 1 and a 1/2 and done. As I understand, he'd be eligible for spring semester, but still have to return for a full year the following season.
Really? I don't know the rules well enough but I still think it's not worth it. I don't think we're going to get him anyway.
As I've said, this was a decision not made by Crean, but for Crean by higher up's. You really don't think Two Tone has the guts to do this on his own do you?
So you think he was some super star in the making? Was he just waiting for the right moment to start playing well? Losing Hanner hurts because of our depth in the front court, but let's not act like he was some super start or anything close to it.
No one has mentioned it but it the dismissal from the team is possibly devastating for Perea. I think Devin will be okay he has a family support system and if he can play he may be at a school like BSU and be playing next season; however, with Perea although someone may pick him up he won't have the "IU for life" support system that seems to be there now. It used to be if you couldn't do anything else after being an IU athlete Cook Industries would find something for you; it was a pretty insular world. I would think that is gone for him now. If you ever googled where he is from in Columbia you would see it is an absolute hell on earth. I hope the best for the both of them. I feel bad for them. They are probably decent guys but the IU rock star culture has maybe ruined their lives. I hope not. We'll see.
lol. No. Most of IU nation thought he was gonna be a super star in the making. I guess Hanner didn't listen to the great developer of big men.
Hanner was a senior who had gotten better every year. He would have been a big asset to Bryant. But since most of you think Bryant is the savior and will reinvent the IU defense I guess Hanner is no loss.
Nope and I don't claim to either. But I'm not the one making wild assumptions here.
Hanner had a really high ceiling. I think it was hard NOT to be excited for someone with his potential. He has gotten better but hasn't live up to any of the hype or even come close to tapping into what seems possible for him.
Bryant more than likely was going to start over Hanner. I don't think anyone thinks Bryant is a savior who will reinvent our defense. What he's going to do is allow us to not have to worry about doubling the post or switch everything like last year. But then again that takes some common sense to understand given what we were lacking in the post last year...
There's truth to this. But the truth is that the IU basketball program is out of control. The neighbor that turned them in knew this. Doyel knew this when he was calling for Crean's head last year. Doing nothing would certainly have been worthy of criticism, but at the same time getting religion when it's a couple of bench players doesn't make me think anything has really changed.
So Tom couldn't develop the big man or maybe Hanner just didn't try hard enough?
Common sense says until CTC decides to emphasize and teach defense instead of just giving it lip service it won't matter who plays the 5. Bryant is gonna face foul problems trying to make up for your joke of a perimeter defense.
Just keep doing what you're doing. You can outscore anybody lol.
I'm pretty sure he just has to be removed from HS for a year. Thus the NBA would be available after his spring semester at IU unless he doesn't even enroll until January.
They don't get kicked off the team if Crean doesn't need the schollies. Fact.There's truth in this one. Crean did the right thing. You can't let this stuff slide. Hanner will be a major loss I think. That makes them razor thin up front. It all hangs on Bryant now.
The age limit requiring American players to be 19 and a year out of high school was implemented in 2005, creating a system where players would simply go to college for a year and then declare for the draft.
Emphasize defense like the the three years before the last? Last year was an anamoly (even for Crean) in terms of bad defense. All you have to do is go look at Kenpom's Adj. Defense to see that. But then again, you have to use your brain to understand these things...
This all worked out well for the clapper. He looks like the disciplinarian; doesn't have to go through the tasteless "spring creaning" and its bad PR anymore this year; and still gets a couple spots opened up.
Interesting perspective on Bryant & Hanner. I would have been surprised if Bryant had started over Hanner. It is very difficult to overcome the 3 years of strenght trainnig, coaching and game experience that Hanner had. To suggest that Bryant could do that seems like a long shot. In any case, we will never know who would have started over who with Hanner gone.
I know Hanner was a bit of an overrated 5* recruit. The rating was based mostly on potential. However, the kid was a good athlete, tall, and could jump well. He was great raw material. His lack of development kind of says the 3 years coaching and experience were not of value to his game. This is a possible argument against the value of player development at IU, so be careful not to fall into the trap. It happens, I suppose, that kids simply don't develop regardless of coaching, but discounting his development and possible contribution next year, is kind of inconsistent with other arguments you have been making over here about IU's ability to develop players.
I do think his departure is a bigger loss than many think. He was clearly the 1st guy off the bench for the 5 spot, if he was not the starter. Athletic centers are not common. At least he would have been 5 more fouls to give, guarding the power centers in the BIG. I think IU will now be much like last year, a donut team. All sweet arount the outside, but a hole in the middle. To hype Bryant as the filling for the hole is falling into the same trap as the hype around Hanner, IMHO. Be careful not to put all of next year's asperations into that one basket.
I think everyone knows these 2 would'nt be the ones to go to simply open up a scholly. Fact.
Hanner wasn't a 5*. He was a 4* and RSCI number 50 or something close to that. He was at one point a 5* but didn't end the rankings that way.Interesting perspective on Bryant & Hanner. I would have been surprised if Bryant had started over Hanner. It is very difficult to overcome the 3 years of strenght trainnig, coaching and game experience that Hanner had. To suggest that Bryant could do that seems like a long shot. In any case, we will never know who would have started over who with Hanner gone.
I know Hanner was a bit of an overrated 5* recruit. The rating was based mostly on potential. However, the kid was a good athlete, tall, and could jump well. He was great raw material. His lack of development kind of says the 3 years coaching and experience were not of value to his game. This is a possible argument against the value of player development at IU, so be careful not to fall into the trap. It happens, I suppose, that kids simply don't develop regardless of coaching, but discounting his development and possible contribution next year, is kind of inconsistent with other arguments you have been making over here about IU's ability to develop players.
I do think his departure is a bigger loss than many think. He was clearly the 1st guy off the bench for the 5 spot, if he was not the starter. Athletic centers are not common. At least he would have been 5 more fouls to give, guarding the power centers in the BIG. I think IU will now be much like last year, a donut team. All sweet arount the outside, but a hole in the middle. To hype Bryant as the filling for the hole is falling into the same trap as the hype around Hanner, IMHO. Be careful not to put all of next year's asperations into that one basket.
I think Hanner got better. I just don't think it was anywhere close to what he COULD have been. It took him three years just to be able to catch the ball reliably. Some kids develop and get better, some don't at all and most fall in between the two. I agree that he would have been the first off the bench at the 5 spot and was worth at least 5 fouls to us when Bryant gets into foul trouble. His defense was getting better, it wasn't good, but it was improving and I had hoped it would have improved again this year. To say that we're going to have a hole in the middle is just absolutely ignoring what we've got coming in. Bryant and Hanner are nowhere NEAR the same type of player. Hell you can tell that from the highlight videos. I think you're discounting the kid too much, which is fine, but I saw tons of the same from you guys when Zeller was coming in. It's almost like you refuse to think freshman can contribute in a major way immediately. Sometimes that is the case and other times it's not. This kid is big, has skill, has played against some of the best bigs in his class and held his own and I fully expect him to be WAY more than you think.Interesting perspective on Bryant & Hanner. I would have been surprised if Bryant had started over Hanner. It is very difficult to overcome the 3 years of strenght trainnig, coaching and game experience that Hanner had. To suggest that Bryant could do that seems like a long shot. In any case, we will never know who would have started over who with Hanner gone.
I know Hanner was a bit of an overrated 5* recruit. The rating was based mostly on potential. However, the kid was a good athlete, tall, and could jump well. He was great raw material. His lack of development kind of says the 3 years coaching and experience were not of value to his game. This is a possible argument against the value of player development at IU, so be careful not to fall into the trap. It happens, I suppose, that kids simply don't develop regardless of coaching, but discounting his development and possible contribution next year, is kind of inconsistent with other arguments you have been making over here about IU's ability to develop players.
I do think his departure is a bigger loss than many think. He was clearly the 1st guy off the bench for the 5 spot, if he was not the starter. Athletic centers are not common. At least he would have been 5 more fouls to give, guarding the power centers in the BIG. I think IU will now be much like last year, a donut team. All sweet arount the outside, but a hole in the middle. To hype Bryant as the filling for the hole is falling into the same trap as the hype around Hanner, IMHO. Be careful not to put all of next year's asperations into that one basket.
Again, he doesn't have to be a 15 and 10 guy for us to be very successful next year. He has to be capable of that on any given night (which it seems he could be), but we don't need him to score that much. He just needs to play good defense, rebound and stay out of foul trouble. I mean, look at Stone, Giddens and Davis. Those are three other big men that should be able to come in and contribute in a major way next year. Bryant is right in line with those guys. Freshman have been known to be factors right away.
You can keep saying I have no common sense or don't use my brain. I actually thought you were different than when you were at H&R. You have made some coherent arguments the last few weeks. Too bad you still have to make fun of people.
Crean doesn't teach traditional defense and you know it. I don't look at the adjusted stats......go ahead and quote them if you like. Crean's teams are fundamentally poor at defense. Getting athletes that can get touches and deflections......and I know he includes all sorts of things in the definition.......is just a method to further the offense. It hurts in crunch time and isn't consistent. Your defensive genius was switching man and zone during the same possession. Brilliant.
Good God I hope we never do that switching defense mid possession crap again. If we did it once or twice every couple of years it may work to cause some confusion. If you run it every other possession, I think other teams catch on. I do agree that Crean is traditionally worse at teaching defense than offense. Stats back that up pretty easily. But he hasn't been THAT bad as last year during his time at IU (IIRC). We were actually pretty good defensively when we had Zeller and Vonleh. Those three years we weren't bad. Prior to that he was always an average at best defensive coach. When thinking about next year, we won't have to be a great defensive team to do well. Our offense should be good enough to keep us in most games. If our defense improves at least a little bit, which is 100% possible and I would call it likely, we're going to be very tough and IMO warrants where some people have us ranked preseason.
You keep saying this but it's unlikely your defense gets better while your offense remains lights out. Adding Bryant alone will remove the only offensive advantage you had last year, playing four guys who can hit the three at once. Playing Bryant and Williams together will leave you with only three shooters and once again allow teams to sag off of Williams and clog the lane. Your high octane offense didn't look so high octane against Purdue and I don't see how that will change. It's no coincidence that after the loss at Purdue, teams began slowing your offense down. We gave them all the blueprint, except for Maryland who refused to learn to not collapse on the driver and continued giving you open looks.
I don't see that changing nearly as much as you do next year. I see a glimmer of hope that things will be different as long as Bryant is on the floor, then once he gets fouls or worn down by better bigs, back to the Colin Hartman is our center reality that we all know exists.
I agree. It's just that if the defense was only marginally better, you might win some of the games you lose when the shooting is off. I just don't get the reasoning for not playing more fundamental defense........but I am old school on that kind of stuff.
I think we were more unorthodox last year because we had no bigs. Hopefully this year is different. We had a top 50 adj defense ranking from Kenpom when Vonleh was here and two of our starters are still here from that team. Hopefully we can get back to that, but we'll see.
Agree to disagree. Let teams clog the lane. I don't think it's crazy to think Blackmon and Johnson will get better. We'll have three high level shooters and a competent big and Hartman will spend some time at the four so that's another. We'll be just fine. I worry about foul trouble with Bryant.
I don't think it's so much that Purdue gave them a blueprint as much as it was who we played. Iowa was a huge team. MSU was just damn good. Olah killed us. All teams with at least a pulse of a big man.
Similar threads
