I'd say he knew exactly what he had there and they didn't match his vision for the B1G. I'm comfortable with that decision.
@gthomas I thought I read here (or may the old site) that BM was not interested in the IU job as he wanted total control of his program and IU had some conditions. Maybe that was just rumor.
@iunorth I don't care if Shaq was next to him. Giving Bailey a million bucks was a total fail. He can't play the 4 in the big ten either.
@cavanagh I'm not sure he and Alexis have been on the court together one time this year... Its incredibly ironic that I'd even think this, with what we went through with Woodson... but I'd like to see what that would look like for a bit in some game soon. Reason for that, Bailey can guard the perimeter, actually very well, and handle the ball on the perimeter as a passer. He would never be parked in the lane like Woodson routinely had with his "2nd big". Some "4" men would still out muscle him, but I think he'd fare better with Alexis also battling for rebounds and interior plays, rather than being relied on to be THE anchor big. Let Alexis set off the ball screens, and dive and duck in for post opportunities. Its not like our offense is moving well, or whipping the ball around the perimeter as it is.
Lets see what Conerway, Wilkerson, DeVries, Bailey, and Alexis look like.
I guess your main basic argument is fine, though. He isn't looking like he's worth the money we gave him. But when we gave it to him... and I know this probably sounds dumb... but at a million bucks, CDD might have thought he was a "bargain" versus what the other mid to top level bigs were commanding. Only a million for a 6-10, first team all conference skilled tall player, that appeared to be trending upward quite a bit (most improved A10 player award)...
He started the year as our most efficient player. He had a better overall game than Alexis did against LVille. I'm not ready to give up on him just yet. I just think CDD should consider playing Alexis alongside him for some stretches here and there.
i am too but come January 20 I'll be jonesing for some Basketball and our season will be over ... why can't we have both
Well if DD has a not great year all the money will continue to go to Cig. They are going to give the money to the program that is winning and has the excitement. I don't know anyone actually super excited about IU bbal right now. With each new hire it gets harder and harder to get excited cause none are ever very impressive hires imo.I believe the money went to Cig and Woodson. But when DeVries arrived, was when the price of poker skyrocketed, Indiana had to play small ball in basketball.
Part of that is DeVries doesnt have the charisma of a Cignetti.
Cignetti said in this weeks press conference (or the title game post conference) that he came to Indiana with a certain commitment of player spending, but when the price of what we needed was higher, that first winter, our commitment he said basically doubled. That fast. In other words my reading is he showed Dolson what he needed, and he was convincing. I dont think DeVries has that strong of a personality.
I think DeVries will get what he needs though. But it may take a little while. Show the intermediate results first. DeVries is a pro coach. No doubt in my mind he will get us near the top within a few years. To the top? I dont know. Ill take near.
,
I am not liking what I see after the losses to Minnesota and Louisville. Lack of of height, speed, ability to create shots, and talent that doesn't appear to be Big 10 level. I'm willing to give DeVries a few more games to right the ship. What are the choices other to throw in the towel?
@bigmike I dont think it is and considering they were all mid major players it is not really that surprising. And all the guys who play will be gone next year so he is going to have to go in the portal again and put a team together.
@bigmike I dont think it is and considering they were all mid major players it is not really that surprising. And all the guys who play will be gone next year so he is going to have to go in the portal again and put a team together.
Well if he fails at it the first time miserably which is it seems like it , why would I want him to go at it again with all that money.
My early season perception: This year, iu will live and die by the three. The last 2 loses, iu shot <=30% if my memory is correct. They need to shoot 42-45% and at volume to make up for a low number of rebounds and not being able to stop bigger faster teams.
Time will tell if I am way off full of crap or spot on.
Might add, I think they shot 55% on 31 attempts and destroyed psu in the process...
@hoosiers94 1) you can't compare any rebuild to what Cignetti's done. I don't have a great memory, but I've asked everyone I know who does to come up with an equal or better rebuild, and no one has. None really even close. So, you're expectation can't be to equal the best that's ever happened or you're setting yourself up to be let down. 2) I've said all along, it was a terrible year to have to rebuild an entire roster, because NIL/Rev Share demands jumped by 25-50% from what I've seen. Also, I think the CMW supporters who were bankrolling him, withheld their money, and of course, football and Cig's success has siphoned $$ away from bball also. Perfect storm of a terrible time for a new coach to have to rebuild and buy an entire roster. It's cheaper to keep existing players than to have to shell out $$ to convince them to come. 3) Overall, I like the team that CDD constructed. It's obviously tilting us towards modern bball that should make us more competitive and more attractive to players. 4) I do think CDD made a monumental error in judgement thinking he could "play small" in the B10, and in thinking he could get by with Bailey at the 5. Playing him there is asking him to do something he's just not capable of, and will lead to problems. I think he'd be great as a 4/point forward. I still say he's the best ball-handling and passing big man we've ever had. He's also great at taking his man off the dribble, so having a roster stacked with shooters and then drivers like he and Connerway is a good approach... but not if you have to then play Bailey at the 5. We sorely needed a post in the B10 and to make the best use of Bailey's talent.
CDD was not my first choice, but I do see lots of positives in what he's done, with one monumental miscalculation/blunder. I'm much more interested in how he responds in building future rosters and can give him a pass this one year, if he adjusts accordingly. He did finally put Alexsis in the starting lineup which I thought should have happened several games ago, but at least did finally happen. Something Woodson never did. Not bringing anyone from WVU I think is a red flag, but again, I think it's just something SD should be monitoring, but it's concerning that we had such a need and WVU had a player who filled it perfectly and it was never mentioned that Hansberry might come here. Could be that CDD didn't like his personality or that he was butthurt over his coach leaving and wouldn't hear of it. I don't blame him for not trying to bring Harris, I think that guy is a chemistry problem.
He can't play the 4 in the big ten either.
Depends on who the other teams 4 is. He's going to struggle against a back to the basket big who is good in the paint. I think TKR would destroy him and he'd foul out in 12 minutes. If it's a perimeter oriented 4, then he'll be fine. It was a monumental miscalculation to think you could get by with him at the 5, especially in the B10. I like him and his skillset if you have someone who can protect the paint on D. I think we'll put Tucker on TKR when we play PU and I think he'll do better than Bailey will.
I think if I was CDD I'd be working on a zone and trap pressure for this years team.
I think that's accurate. It is the way the team is built. And as many threes as we will jack up, hitting a very sweet percentage like that would be very tough to beat. So its almost a bit of a trueism. If we hit a high percentage we surely win a ton, below average, lose a lot.My early season perception: This year, iu will live and die by the three. The last 2 loses, iu shot <=30% if my memory is correct. They need to shoot 42-45% and at volume to make up for a low number of rebounds and not being able to stop bigger faster teams.
Time will tell if I am way off full of crap or spot on.
At least the Penn State game and a couple others show that against poor defenses, hitting threes also opens up our cuts, so a little robustness there -make a good percentage of threes, our percentage of layups goes up too. Trouble will be the teams that do better being in our face on the perimeter, forcing it deeper, or have 'length' to defend, then we seem to fall apart because our cuts are more difficult too.