Wednesday, December 10, 2014

That's the Game: Louisville

Sorry it's been so long without a post; Thanksgiving Break threw off my schedule, along with my upcoming finals and all of the papers and projects I had to finish by today.


The Hoosiers lost to the Louisville Cardinals 94-74, although the game was much closer than the score implies, with IU remaining in striking distance for about three quarters of the game.  With this being an away game and me watching it on TV with my computer in front of me instead of at Assembly Hall without a computer, I’m changing up my format a bit.  I’ll recap the first half, followed by the second half (weird, I know), followed by a rundown of the good and the not-so-good overall.  So to start things off…

Half Number One:

Well, if you had told me that the Hoosiers would turn the ball over 13 times and give up 14 offensive rebounds (with only four of their own) in the first half I would have thought they would be down by several factors of 10.  Instead, thanks to 70% shooting from deep, the Hoosiers trailed the Cardinals of Louisville by only five points with the high score of 41-46.

The Hoosiers started off strong, primarily thanks to an amazingly aggressive Hanner Mosquera-Perea, who took two charges and eight points in the half.  And while he only had two rebounds, he was doing a good job of getting his man out of the way enough for another Hoosier to swoop in for the board.  But all things must come to an end, and Mosquera-Perea picked up two fouls in the half, causing him to sit.  Now in games past this wasn’t necessarily the end of the world, with guys like Emmitt Holt and Collin Hartman picking up the slack.  This just simply didn’t happen, and while Mosquera-Perea was ridding the pine the Louisville big men took advantage to emphatically slam put-back after put-back.

As already mentioned, the Hoosiers turned it over 13 times in the half, with four of these coming from Stan Robinson off the bench in limited minutes.  No other Hoosier had more than two (Troy Williams, James Blackmon Jr., and Hartman).  Many of these turnovers came from two things: the Louisville press and poor decisions off of penetration (whether it was a picked pocket on the drive or a failed dish).  The two players who looked particularly out of control were Robinson and Williams, something which does not bode well for the Hoosiers.  They were loose with the ball (particularly Robinson while manning the point through the press) and seemed to have very poor shot selection, going a combined 2-6 in the half.  Between the large number of turnovers and giving up so many offensive rebounds, the Hoosiers had 18 fewer possessions than Louisville, and yet were somehow only down five at the half.

They did this with good shot selection and lights-out shooting, as evidenced by the ridiculous 70% from deep.  Everyone was hitting them, with Nick Zeisloft having two particularly timely threes and Max Hoetzel making one while being fouled.  The Hoosiers also, minus one stretch with Yogi Ferrell on the bench, broke the Cardinal press with relative ease.  That one bad stretch showed that this team really needed him (as also evidenced by the 35 minutes he played total).  It was especially difficult during times when both Robert Johnson and Ferrell were on the bench, as the point guard depth is actually not much better than the post depth.   Minus the one stretch, the Hoosier offense clicked better than could be expected, scoring almost as many points by the half as Louisville gives up in a game.

The defense, on the other hand, had some issues (many of them the same as previous games).  As the Hoosiers were undersized most of the night, they heavily relied on their 2-3 zone.  Now, it needs to be said that this zone has improved this season.  But it still leaves the vulnerability of giving up offensive rebounds, something the Hoosiers didn’t want to give up.  The Indiana version of the 2-3 zone had particular trouble with over-helping and being over-rotated, leaving shooters open on the perimeter.  At the same time, Louisville had way too many easy drives as a result of poor switching.  While all of these areas have seen improvement this season, they need to improve more for the Hoosiers to compete against the best in the country.

Half Number Two (aka Second Verse, Same as the First… defensively):

The second half played out similarly to the first, with the Hoosiers giving up way too many rebounds and struggling on defense.  They gave up another 12 offensive rebounds and continued to have no answer in the post on defense, especially when Mosquera-Perea picked up his third foul four minutes into the half.  Hartman seemed uncharacteristically out of position, however, it should be said that he has never been (or been asked to be) a center.  At 6’7”, he’s undersized, even if he does play bigger than he is.  In this game, he was too easily drawn away from the post, leaving it open for players to drive and dish to the big men.  The same could be said of Holt, for whom the game was just too fast for his current capabilities.  The one time the Mosquera-Perea-less post played semi-decently was when Holt, Hartman, and Williams played together, but even then they were still often out of position.

Once again, the Indiana 2-3 zone was over-helping and over-rotated, leaving shooters open all night.  While Louisville ended the game 8-23 from deep, the Hoosiers frequently lost guard Terry Rozier on the perimeter, allowing him to go 5-8 from deep on his own, while fellow guard Chris Jones was 2-4.  There was also an issue in guarding the high post, another hallmark of the zone.  The post players were unable to come up to guard them without leaving the deep post unguarded, and the guards were unable to leave the perimeter without risking giving up the three.

The offensive end was a bit more of a mixed bag, showing some flashes while also offering some face-palming mistakes.  To get the bad news out of the way, Williams and Robinson remained underwhelming (even if each had some positive plays).  Robinson ended the game with five turnovers in nine total minutes while also only going 1-3 from the floor and 0-1 from the free throw line.  Williams, who ended with three turnovers (including a palming call) and several very poor decision.  The moral of the story for Williams is that he is not currently a ball handler in any way, shape, or form and that he needs to go back to what he does best: finishing the play emphatically above the rim.

The Hoosiers had some further trouble in a few other offensive areas: turnovers on drives, getting to the free throw line (and hitting the free throws), and overall shooting in the second half.  There were only six second-half turnovers (compared to 13 in the first half), but many of these came off of failed/wild drive-and-kick attempts, with the ball either sailing out of bounds or into the waiting arms of a Louisville player.  After shooting lights-out in the first half, the water more than found its level, with the team going 1-8 from deep in the second half.  Shots began to look forced with about eight minutes left, corresponding with the Hoosiers beginning to appear fatigued.  This makes sense, with this being a young team and the game being at a very fast pace.  The Hoosiers, who have been very good getting to the line this season, struggled in this area, only shooting 14 free throws for a free throw rate of only 23%.  At the same time, they only hit eight of those shots, with only Williams hitting all of his and five different Hoosiers missing at least one.  All three of these areas helped put the nail in the coffin for an Indiana team that, as Coach Crean said, would have to play “out of its mind” in order to win.

A positive offensive note would have to be the play of Mosquera-Perea, who may have perhaps been possessed by Cody Zeller on that end of the court.  He stayed aggressive (even though it meant foul trouble) and flashed some post moves that had not been seen from him at this level.  He stayed composed and still played minutes even with three fouls early in the half and after picking up his fourth with over eight minutes to go.  He was really looking for his shots while still knowing when it was better to dish to a teammate and was 5-6 from the field with only a single turnover.

The Good:

  • Hope.  I don’t know if I’ve ever felt this optimistic after a 20-point loss.  The Hoosiers showed that they can play with one of the best teams in the country, for about 32 minutes.  This is a sign of improvement for a team that lost to Eastern Washington earlier in the season (although not as bad as losing to Eastern Michigan and the New Jersey Institute of Technology – sorry Michigan fans).  For the first time since this season started, I’m not absolutely terrified of the Big Ten season, a very good thing for this team.


  • Ball movement (when not turning it over).  The Hoosiers ended with 14 assists on 29 made field goals, which is better than their assist-to-turnover ratio would indicate.  Even though 10 of those assists came in the first half, it’s pretty difficult to rack up assists when the shots aren’t falling.  This ball movement is critical for this team which relies so heavily on its offensive ability, and as long as the turnovers can be cut down to where they’ve normally been this offense will continue to run well.


  • Play of Mosquera-Perea and Ferrell.  I’ve talked a lot about this so far, so I’ll try to keep it brief.  Mosquera-Perea was channeling the big men who have come before him and showed offensive moves rivaling those players.  He also picked it up on the defensive end, even if he was outmatched by the Louisville bigs.  If he can continue to play at this level, the Hoosiers will have a better shot come Big Ten season.  Ferrell sort of quietly put together a very good stat line of 13 points, seven rebounds, five assists, a steal, and two turnovers in a team-high 35 minutes on the floor.  It’s never a good thing when your 6’0” (ish) point guard is your leading rebounder, but Ferrell’s seven rebounds is an encouraging sign for the play of the guards.  When Ferrell was in there was a definite change in the demeanor of the team, with even the youngest players playing like veterans.  He was not given many breaks, and the times he did grab a breather on the bench the Hoosier offense floundered.  The coming of the talented guard combo of Blackmon Jr. and Johnson may have taken some of the scoring burden off of Ferrell’s shoulders but make no mistake, this is still his team and he is the undisputed leader.


  • Play of Johnson and Zeisloft.  Johnson and Zeisloft both also somewhat quietly played well.  Johnson, who only had five points, also had a few boards and a couple assists, but also did a decent job of handling the ball, helping to break the Louisville press with relative ease.  He does not always have to put up flashy numbers to have a good game and will only continue to improve as the season goes on.  Zeisloft, who for some reason really didn’t play much the second half, had nine points in 15 minutes on the court, going 3-5 from deep.  And each of his threes were timely, with his first pulling the Hoosiers within two about half-way through the first half.  His second and third threes came in an amazing sequence for the transfer redshirt junior where, with the Hoosiers down 12, he grabbed a defensive rebound, hit a three on the ensuing possession to cut the deficit to nine, hit another three on the next possession to cut the lead to six, and ended it with a steal on the next defensive possession which led to a transition layup for Blackmon Jr. to get Indiana within four with about a minute to play.  For those scoring at home, that means Zeisloft had a role in eight consecutive points to get the Hoosiers back within striking distance to go into the half.  He has really settled into his role and no longer forces plays as often as in the first few games, a good sign for a Hoosier team who needs the sort of veteran leadership to counteract its youth.


The Not-so-good:

  • Defense (interior, perimeter, and everywhere in between).  Any time the opponent puts up 94 points, you have to be concerned about the defense, even if it is against one of the best teams in the country.  The Hoosiers had trouble all over the court, not stopping Louisville from driving for the layup (or dish) or getting the offensive rebound, not stopping the Cardinals from taking the deep shots from the perimeter, and not stopping them from thriving in the high post.  The offensive rebounds were particularly concerning, with Louisville rebounding on 52% of its misses.  This has been a theme for Indiana, but is one which can typically be overcome if they can not turn the ball over and can hit a high percentage of shots.  Or in the case of the first half they can both get outrebounded horribly and turn the ball over a lot as long as they hit at least 70% of their shots from deep.


  • Turnovers.  The second half was much better than the first, but the Hoosiers still coughed the ball up 19 times in the game.  The more positive thing for IU is that the Cardinals were only able to score 19 points off those turnovers, whereas Indiana had 15 points off of Louisville’s 12 turnovers.  Many of the turnovers came from two areas: against the press and on failed drive-and-kicks.  Another positive?  Not many teams Indiana will face press with the same ability as Louisville.  But the moral of the story is you can’t give up the ball on a quarter of your possessions (especially not when also giving up a 52% offensive rebound rate) and hope to win.


  • Fatigue.  This was a ridiculously fast-paced game with 77 possessions, second only to the Mississippi Valley State game which had 81 possessions.  About 32 minutes in, the Hoosiers were just about ready to collapse, leaving all of their shots (including free throws) short and having trouble getting back on defense.  This, however, should not concern Indiana fans too much, at least not yet.  Louisville is a very fast team which is built to play that fast.  The Hoosiers, on the other hand, are a young team that likes to play at their own speed (which is also pretty fast) but who struggle if the pace is dictated by the other team (especially if it means speeding up).  This will improve as Indiana moves through the season and gains experience, and may actually be beneficial to young guys before they go into Big Ten play.


  • The play of Williams and Robinson.  I’ve touched on this already and really am going to keep it brief.  Both of these players showed flashes of inspiration, but played way too wild to do their team any good and especially seemed disturbed by Louisville’s pushed pace.  I’m hoping this is an anomaly and Williams will remember that he is a fantastic finisher, not a ball handler, and that Robinson will regain the confidence he needs to play at his own speed rather than the speed of his opponent.  Both of these things are possible if they’re willing to work, and I believe they both are.


The Final Word:

I am surprisingly optimistic after a 20-point loss (even though the game was closer than that most of the time).  Really everything’s been said already.  You can’t turn it over and give up offensive rebounds as often as the Hoosiers did and expect to beat a top-tier team.  They overall played well and will hopefully use this experience in preparation to face Butler (Dec. 20) and Georgetown (Dec 27) before diving into the Big Ten schedule by travelling to both Nebraska (Dec. 31) and Michigan State (Jan. 5) before playing host to Ohio State (Jan. 10).

** Noteworthy News**

Yogi Ferrell, with his five assists, moved up to 323 assists in his career, which is a tie with Joe Hillman for 17th all-time at IU.  He needs two to join Jim Wisman at 16th (325) and eight more to join Brian Evans at 15th (332).  The record is 545 by Michael Lewis from 1997-2000, which Ferrell could break next year if his assists stay roughly where they are (he averaged 136 the last two seasons with 147 and 125. Maintaining that average over four years puts him at 544. As a note, he’s on pace for about 180 assists this season).

Ferrell also has 975 points in his career, needing only 25 to be the sixth player in the Crean era to surpass the 1,000 point mark.

Up Next:


The Hoosiers briefly return to their cupcake-eating ways on Saturday, Dec. 13th when they host the Antelopes (or just Lopes) from Grand Canyon University.  They start a fairly short lineup, with four players 6’3” and one who is 6’8”.  They do have a few taller guys who get into the rotation (two who are 6’9” and two who are 6’11”), but the two tallest guys only play 10-12 percent of the team’s minutes and neither has played in every game.  The Lopes do a decent job of limiting opponent three-point percentage and not much else.  They are 4-5, with the wins all coming out of the 300-range of the KenPom rankings (and one from outside Division I) while the losses are a mixed bag, ranging from 284th-ranked Idaho St. to 1st-ranked Kentucky (by 40 points).  They have three players averaging double-digit points, led by senior guard Royce Woolridge at 12.3 points per game, followed by senior guard Jerome Garrison and junior guard Ryan Majerle with 11.7 and 10 points respectively.  Pomeroy predicts the Hoosiers to win 82-64 with a 95% chance of victory, and if the Hoosiers play with the aggression they did against Louisville it could be even worse than that.  I’m going to say it’ll be closer to 90-66 for a final score.  Of course, they could always pull a Michigan, which none of us want.

No comments:

Post a Comment