Vik can make us big at the 5, Ody can make us big at the 4 and Hensley/Skillings/Reed can make us big at the 3. I think the season hinges on those 5 guys. They've got the size, length and athleticism to match just about anyone in the country. Ody and especially Vik have good offensive numbers (Vik's are better than Ody's and Ezikpe's). But they lack experience and last year Ody/Hensley/Vik made so many mental errors it was hard to keep them on the floor. We need to have a great off-season for player development and turn our better athletes into basketball players.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
22-23 Team Discussion
- Thread starter Queens_NYC
- Start date
Help Support BearcatTalk:
Vik can make us big at the 5, Ody can make us big at the 4 and Hensley/Skillings/Reed can make us big at the 3. I think the season hinges on those 5 guys. They've got the size, length and athleticism to match just about anyone in the country. Ody and especially Vik have good offensive numbers (Vik's are better than Ody's and Ezikpe's). But they lack experience and last year Ody/Hensley/Vik made so many mental errors it was hard to keep them on the floor. We need to have a great off-season for player development and turn our better athletes into basketball players.
Yeah, we have guys with size. But I think we're looking at a starting lineup of Phinisee/DDJ/Newman/Davenport/Ody. That's a really small starting 5. And if Wes uses his same set substitution patterns, they're going to be playing together a lot. If we're looking at McNeil on the wing, the problem only gets worse.Vik can make us big at the 5, Ody can make us big at the 4 and Hensley/Skillings/Reed can make us big at the 3. I think the season hinges on those 5 guys. They've got the size, length and athleticism to match just about anyone in the country. Ody and especially Vik have good offensive numbers (Vik's are better than Ody's and Ezikpe's). But they lack experience and last year Ody/Hensley/Vik made so many mental errors it was hard to keep them on the floor. We need to have a great off-season for player development and turn our better athletes into basketball players.
Trying to predict rotations is difficult with this roster. A lot will depend on offseason development and what Wes thinks each player's role is. And of course another transfer could shake everything up. My best guess with the current roster:
PG: Phinisee 25 / MAW 15
SG: DDJ 30 / Skillings 10
SF: Newman 25 / Davenport 10 / Reed 5
PF: Davenport 15 / Ody 15 / Hensley 10
C: Ody 5 / Ezikpe 20 / Lakhin 15
PG: Phinisee 25 / MAW 15
SG: DDJ 30 / Skillings 10
SF: Newman 25 / Davenport 10 / Reed 5
PF: Davenport 15 / Ody 15 / Hensley 10
C: Ody 5 / Ezikpe 20 / Lakhin 15
Queens_NYC
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 8, 2017
- Messages
- 1,655
Trying to predict rotations is difficult with this roster. A lot will depend on offseason development and what Wes thinks each player's role is. And of course another transfer could shake everything up. My best guess with the current roster:
PG: Phinisee 25 / MAW 15
SG: DDJ 30 / Skillings 10
SF: Newman 25 / Davenport 10 / Reed 5
PF: Davenport 15 / Ody 15 / Hensley 10
C: Ody 5 / Ezikpe 20 / Lakhin 15
This just shows how difficult it will be to throw another "impact" transfer into this team and keep everybody happy with minutes.
Here's my take:
PG: Phinisee 22 / MAW 18
SG: DDJ 28 / Skillings 8 / MAW 4
SF: Newman 24 / Reed 8 / Davenport 8
PF: Davenport 16 / Hensley 12 / Ezikpe 8 / Ody 4
C: Ody 16 / Lakhin 14 / Ezikpe 10
DDJ 28
Davenport 24
Newman 24
Phinisee 22
MAW 22
Ody 20
Ezikpe 18
Lakhin 14
Hensley 12
Skillings 8
Reed 8
There's a chance that some of these guys will end up on the bench average 5 or fewer minutes. Reed, Skillings, Vik, Ody, Hensley and Ezikpe are all guys I could see being benched. Wes seems to value defensive rotations, pick-and-roll defense and offensive spacing, last year Vik/Ody/Hensley struggled to stay on the floor because of it. Ezikpe is bad at pick-and-roll defense and not a particularly good defender. Reed/Skillings are uknowns, but Skillings is going to go from playing the wing in a zone (at least based on what I've watched of him, which isn't a ton) to playing man-to-man as a SG, it may take an adjustment period (on the other hand, there's not a lot of other options for SG on the roster currently).
My prediction with current roster:
PG: MAW 25 / Phinisee 15
SG: DDJ 28 / Newman 12
SF: Newman 12 / Hensley 20 / Skillings 8
PF: Davenport 25 / Ezikpe 5/ Ody 5/ Reed 5
C: Vik 20 / Ody 15 / Ezikpe 5
My prediction with current roster:
PG: MAW 25 / Phinisee 15
SG: DDJ 28 / Newman 12
SF: Newman 12 / Hensley 20 / Skillings 8
PF: Davenport 25 / Ezikpe 5/ Ody 5/ Reed 5
C: Vik 20 / Ody 15 / Ezikpe 5
Phinisee and MAW sharing PG duties means we need to get more offense from the 3 and 5 positions. And we're going to be very small at just about every position. Hopefully Phinisee lives up to his defensive reputation and can do a better job of penetrating than our MAW/Saunders pairing last year.
No doubt we need scoring to go with DDJ and JD. We should be significantly better in the paint this year with Vik, Ody and Kalu. In fact it should probably be a focal point to get the ball down there more often.
But just the addition of some paint scoring is not going to get us to the dance. We need (as you say) someone to score/shoot from the wing. That would give us 4 options rather than 3 and take some focus of DDJ or JD etc.
A little more on Phinisee, he's really bad at shooting. Worse than MAW bad. His assist and TO rates are also worse than MAW's. He is supposed to be an excellent defender - though EvanMiya gives reason to think he might just be very good - and has good rebound, steal and block rates for his size (better than MAW is all three categories), his foul rate is pretty high for a guard though.
His best shooting percentage on far 2's in his career (4 seasons) is .260%, his best shooting percentage from 3 is .33% and he's a career .290% 3 pt shooter. A lingering injury is claimed to have effected him last year, but I see no reason to believe it effected his shooting. He's a really bad shooter no matter what season you look at.
The only glimmer of hope on offense is his close 2 rate has only been bad 2 out of 4 years and has been closer to average the other 2. He may be a little better at finishing at the rim than MAW. Though I imagine it's hard for him to get there when there's no reason to respect his shot from beyond 10 ft.
I'd rate him as an wash for Saunders based on Saunders last season, however Saunders had a lot more potential to improve. This year I think Saunders would have been (and probably will be at Utah) a better player. So a downgrade vs Saunders for next year. Hopefully we add a better third transfer, or Skillngs/Reed manage to contribute quickly at the wing next year.
I would guess he is an excellent defender based off comments of Hoosier fans etc. He normally draws the toughest assignments when he is in the game. Some players we try to hide on D can probably rate as good defenders or average when we know they suck big time.
Still not super stoked about Rob but at least we are getting better on one side of the ball.
I would guess he is an excellent defender based off comments of Hoosier fans etc. He normally draws the toughest assignments when he is in the game. Some players we try to hide on D can probably rate as good defenders or average when we know they suck big time.
Still not super stoked about Rob but at least we are getting better on one side of the ball.
Rob could be a good addition on the right sort of team, a team with a lot of scorers that he can distribute to. The big problem with our team is the lack of well rounded players who are good on offense, defense and at rebounding.
We have one guy who is good on both sides of the ball in DDJ and there's some reason to debate that claim (he's undersized defensively and not a good three point shooter).
We've got two guys who are scorers, but poor at defense and/or rebounding: Davenport and Ezikpe.
We've have three guys who are excellent at defense, but bad shooters: MAW, Phinisee and Newman (though Newman has some offensive potential).
Then we've got 5 guys who have the potential to be effective on both sides of the ball, but thus far haven't proven it on either side of the ball for long stretches: Ody, Hensley, Vik, Skillings and Reed.
A team can manage with a couple of one skill guys on the court at the same time, but usually no more than 2. We need at least 3/4 guys who are effective on both ends of the court.
If Rob is an excellent defender then I can accept his poor shooting as an individual player. The problem is that he will be playing alongside a 6' SG who isn't a great defender. I think that's going to counter some of Rob's strength on D. If the other team's best guard is the PG, it will make sense to put Rob on him. But that means we might have DDJ on a 6'6" SG. If their best player is a 6'6" SG, it might make more sense to have Newman on him and then we have Rob going up against a SF. And we're undersized with Davenport at the 4. It's hard to have a great defense with such a small lineup.
There's been a lot of debate about Davenport's role and the more I think about it the more I prefer him at the 3. He's supposed to be a "matchup problem" at the 4 but I don't think that's true. He doesn't have a good enough handle to get by most PFs when driving. And he doesn't finish very well either. So really he's just a shooter, which would create a matchup problem at the 5 but not so much the 4. Most PFs in the modern game can follow a guy who isn't that quick around the perimeter, especially if they don't need to be too worried about the drive.
We want three point shooting from Davenport. He can give us that just as well from the 3 spot. Defense I think is a wash. He's going to have issues whether he's guarding a bigger guy or a quicker guy. The benefit in moving him to the 3 is rebounding. It lets us play two bigs who can rebound and potentially score inside, and I think Davenport would be a good rebounder for a 3.
Although the positions are nominally switched, Skyblade's rotation actually hints at that. He has Hensley playing 20 minutes at the 3 and Davenport 25 minutes at the 4. Playing those two together gives us more size and rebounding. It doesn't really matter which positions they are assigned. That will be something to consider if we don't bring in a wing.
We want three point shooting from Davenport. He can give us that just as well from the 3 spot. Defense I think is a wash. He's going to have issues whether he's guarding a bigger guy or a quicker guy. The benefit in moving him to the 3 is rebounding. It lets us play two bigs who can rebound and potentially score inside, and I think Davenport would be a good rebounder for a 3.
Although the positions are nominally switched, Skyblade's rotation actually hints at that. He has Hensley playing 20 minutes at the 3 and Davenport 25 minutes at the 4. Playing those two together gives us more size and rebounding. It doesn't really matter which positions they are assigned. That will be something to consider if we don't bring in a wing.
There's been a lot of debate about Davenport's role and the more I think about it the more I prefer him at the 3. He's supposed to be a "matchup problem" at the 4 but I don't think that's true. He doesn't have a good enough handle to get by most PFs when driving. And he doesn't finish very well either. So really he's just a shooter, which would create a matchup problem at the 5 but not so much the 4. Most PFs in the modern game can follow a guy who isn't that quick around the perimeter, especially if they don't need to be too worried about the drive.
We want three point shooting from Davenport. He can give us that just as well from the 3 spot. Defense I think is a wash. He's going to have issues whether he's guarding a bigger guy or a quicker guy. The benefit in moving him to the 3 is rebounding. It lets us play two bigs who can rebound and potentially score inside, and I think Davenport would be a good rebounder for a 3.
Although the positions are nominally switched, Skyblade's rotation actually hints at that. He has Hensley playing 20 minutes at the 3 and Davenport 25 minutes at the 4. Playing those two together gives us more size and rebounding. It doesn't really matter which positions they are assigned. That will be something to consider if we don't bring in a wing.
I agree. You are hiding JD on the easiest guy to defend no matter where he plays on offense. I like him at the 3 as well. We will be hedging towards JD on help defense whether he guards a 3 or 4. Can we do that with Ody or Kalu at the 4 or Hensley? I would hope so. It would be nice if one of those bigs could develop a 3 point shot. Vik, Ody, Kalu, Hensley etc or maybe even Reed? So we can keep one in the paint and one on the perimeter.
Rob could be a good addition on the right sort of team, a team with a lot of scorers that he can distribute to. The big problem with our team is the lack of well rounded players who are good on offense, defense and at rebounding.
We have one guy who is good on both sides of the ball in DDJ and there's some reason to debate that claim (he's undersized defensively and not a good three point shooter).
We've got two guys who are scorers, but poor at defense and/or rebounding: Davenport and Ezikpe.
We've have three guys who are excellent at defense, but bad shooters: MAW, Phinisee and Newman (though Newman has some offensive potential).
Then we've got 5 guys who have the potential to be effective on both sides of the ball, but thus far haven't proven it on either side of the ball for long stretches: Ody, Hensley, Vik, Skillings and Reed.
A team can manage with a couple of one skill guys on the court at the same time, but usually no more than 2. We need at least 3/4 guys who are effective on both ends of the court.
I think we have to file this under "it is what it is" right now. I mean it's not going to change because we want it to. Sure we have one more portal to add and hopefully that is a shooter/scorer who can also defend but what are the odds of getting both right now? Let's get a scorer IMO. Slasher/shooter I don't care. Then let the chips fall where they may.
There's been a lot of debate about Davenport's role and the more I think about it the more I prefer him at the 3. He's supposed to be a "matchup problem" at the 4 but I don't think that's true. He doesn't have a good enough handle to get by most PFs when driving. And he doesn't finish very well either. So really he's just a shooter, which would create a matchup problem at the 5 but not so much the 4. Most PFs in the modern game can follow a guy who isn't that quick around the perimeter, especially if they don't need to be too worried about the drive.
We want three point shooting from Davenport. He can give us that just as well from the 3 spot. Defense I think is a wash. He's going to have issues whether he's guarding a bigger guy or a quicker guy. The benefit in moving him to the 3 is rebounding. It lets us play two bigs who can rebound and potentially score inside, and I think Davenport would be a good rebounder for a 3.
Although the positions are nominally switched, Skyblade's rotation actually hints at that. He has Hensley playing 20 minutes at the 3 and Davenport 25 minutes at the 4. Playing those two together gives us more size and rebounding. It doesn't really matter which positions they are assigned. That will be something to consider if we don't bring in a wing.
On the offensive end the "matchup problem" doesn't really exist either. Miller said as much at some point near the end of last season, teams put their better defenders on Davenport and DDJ and the worse defenders on Newman, MAW and Ado. It doesn't matter if it's a smaller defender, because Davenport doesn't have much of a post-up game (hopefully that will change next year).
For mismatches to matter we need enough skilled offensive players that teams can't pretty much ignore certain guys. As I've already said, it all comes down to having guys who are good on both ends of the court.
I had the same nominally switched concept with Newman at SG and Skillings at SF (hopefully Skillings will bring offense off the bench). I think they will play together a fair amount, but Newman will always take the tougher defensive assignment.
The big questions will be is DDJ willing to play PG at times and does a two bigs lineup make us better than a line-up with a true PG and DDJ at SG. The answer is unclear and is really going to depend on how well Ody/Lakhin/Hensley develop.
On the offensive end the "matchup problem" doesn't really exist either. Miller said as much at some point near the end of last season, teams put their better defenders on Davenport and DDJ and the worse defenders on Newman, MAW and Ado. It doesn't matter if it's a smaller defender, because Davenport doesn't have much of a post-up game (hopefully that will change next year).
For mismatches to matter we need enough skilled offensive players that teams can't pretty much ignore certain guys. As I've already said, it all comes down to having guys who are good on both ends of the court.
I had the same nominally switched concept with Newman at SG and Skillings at SF (hopefully Skillings will bring offense off the bench). I think they will play together a fair amount, but Newman will always take the tougher defensive assignment.
The big questions will be is DDJ willing to play PG at times and does a two bigs lineup make us better than a line-up with a true PG and DDJ at SG. The answer is unclear and is really going to depend on how well Ody/Lakhin/Hensley develop.
I agree with your point about JD posting up more on smaller guards. I actually think he is pretty decent at it. He has a decent short and mid range 2 game. His main threat is shooting 3's of course but if other teams are taking that away we need to change that up a bit.
If we had enough options on offense that would not be necessary. We shall see what happens with the last portal add. If we don't get McNeil it's hard to imagine getting enough fire power to address the issue.
Cincy Slangin put out a podcast with a long time IU fan. The comparison they made for Phinisee is Justin Jenifer without the jumper. Did say that Archie Miller destroyed any confidence Rob may have had in his 3 and a new environment may help.
I was thinking Jamual Warren. He was a great on ball defender and decent distributor who couldn't shoot at all. And he played alongside a 6' scorer in Deonta Vaughn.Cincy Slangin put out a podcast with a long time IU fan. The comparison they made for Phinisee is Justin Jenifer without the jumper. Did say that Archie Miller destroyed any confidence Rob may have had in his 3 and a new environment may help.
Cincy Slangin put out a podcast with a long time IU fan. The comparison they made for Phinisee is Justin Jenifer without the jumper. Did say that Archie Miller destroyed any confidence Rob may have had in his 3 and a new environment may help.
I don’t recall JJ being elite on ball defender.
cincrulz11
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 17, 2013
- Messages
- 4,329
I just don't see what the plan is. I have no idea what type of roster we're trying to build, outside of one without any scorers.
This was a worry I had about Wes. When looking at his coaching history, he didn't really have a pattern of what his teams did well (outside of not turning the ball over, and not getting to the FT line). EFGD was all over the place, EFGO was just bad, even tempo was all over the place.
There doesn't seem to be a system.
This was a worry I had about Wes. When looking at his coaching history, he didn't really have a pattern of what his teams did well (outside of not turning the ball over, and not getting to the FT line). EFGD was all over the place, EFGO was just bad, even tempo was all over the place.
There doesn't seem to be a system.
I just don't see what the plan is. I have no idea what type of roster we're trying to build, outside of one without any scorers.
This was a worry I had about Wes. When looking at his coaching history, he didn't really have a pattern of what his teams did well (outside of not turning the ball over, and not getting to the FT line). EFGD was all over the place, EFGO was just bad, even tempo was all over the place.
There doesn't seem to be a system.
If you look at just the multi-year guys he has brought in there does seem to be a theme of size, length and athleticism, much like Cronin used to do. Skillings, Reed, Tolentino, Ody, Newman, Hensley and McGinnis (who is the one exception).
But it seems Wes is much more willing to compromise for short term guys or guys he inherited from the previous roster than Cronin probably would have been. I think the transfer portal simply did not provide that many options. Wes seems set on playing 10 deep and that means he had to add some guys who can play immediately, even if they aren't perfect fits. At least that's my guess.
I like Wes and hope he does well here, but I definitely find some of his personnel choices questionable as well. I would have preferred Saunders stayed (even if it meant DDJ leaving), I think we need some youth at guard to develop coming into 2023 and 2024.
sirthought
Well-known member
I cringed most of the Jennifer was on the floor, except for his senior year when he finally started to produce something/anything.
As far as the Davenport position. He's a 3. He's a 3. He's a 3. Speed be damned. Let's get the power forward-sized guys on the floor and teach them all to play defense TOGETHER, so any deficiencies can be made up for. The team's physical attributes are what they are.
I'd love to see more Syracuse style zone employed and let the guys exert energy, but also save more for offense.
As far as the Davenport position. He's a 3. He's a 3. He's a 3. Speed be damned. Let's get the power forward-sized guys on the floor and teach them all to play defense TOGETHER, so any deficiencies can be made up for. The team's physical attributes are what they are.
I'd love to see more Syracuse style zone employed and let the guys exert energy, but also save more for offense.