That’s A Wrap: Hanner Mosquera-Perea, Peter Jurkin

  • 04/03/2013 8:56 am in

IUBryantITH0030

Welcome to “That’s A Wrap,” our player-by-player recap of the 2012-2013 Indiana Hoosiers. Today: Hanner Mosquera-Perea and Peter Jurkin.

Mosquera-Perea (20 games): 0.9 ppg, 1.5 rpg, 38.5% FG, 41.2% FT in 5.7 minutes per game.
Jurkin (3 games): No stats recorded in seven total minutes.

A major storyline early in Indiana’s season was the eligibility status of freshmen Hanner Mosquera-Perea and Peter Jurkin. Both players ultimately were suspended for nine games for accepting benefits from their AAU coach, Mark Adams, who was later deemed to be an IU booster by the NCAA because of varsity club bumper stickers he purchased before either player was born.

The NCAA’s ruling, when it was made public in early November, was so unbelievable that it angered many fans and fueled discussion from commentators like Jay Bilas on just how out of touch the organization based in Indianapolis had become.

And for Mosquera-Perea and Jurkin, neither of whom understood at the time why the NCAA had reached its decision to keep them sidelined, it was the beginning of a season that would never get on track. By the time both players became eligible on Dec. 15 for Indiana’s game with Butler at Bankers Life Fieldhouse, valuable game time in the early non-conference season had already been missed.

Jurkin played sparingly in three games — Florida Atlantic, Jacksonville and Penn State — before being shut down with an undisclosed foot injury. By the end of the season, he wasn’t even dressing and was wearing a boot. And Mosquera-Perea, who had an ankle issue in the fall and into the early season, never played more than eight minutes in a game after Big Ten play tipped off.

Coming into the season, Indiana’s depth was viewed by many as a strength and both players (Mosquera-Perea to a greater extent) figured to be a part of a frontline that could spell Cody Zeller when the All-American needed a break. That never materialized. Moving into next season, it’s hard to take inventory and come up with a good idea of the role either player will fill in the program moving forward.

Mosquera-Perea, who was once rated a five-star recruit by several recruiting services, still possesses the athletic ability and raw power around the basket to become a regular contributor and perhaps a very good player one day. Tom Crean had faith to play Mosquera-Perea minutes against Syracuse and several key late season games. But his game is unrefined at this point and the primary recipe for that is repetition and getting into the gym for long hours all summer.

Jurkin is more of a mystery because he was rarely on the court and his foot problems have now claimed two of his last three seasons of basketball. ESPN.com analyst Dave Telep once told me that Jurkin would be well-served to develop into the role of Baye Keita has at Syracuse, essentially serving as a rim protector first and foremost. Currently he’s a long way from that, so getting healthy and getting into the gym loom large for Jurkin during the offseason.

Bottom line: Once heralded as major pieces in a top ten recruiting class, neither Jurkin or Mosquera-Perea played much of a factor in IU’s Big Ten championship season. Both players have considerable work to do to become regular rotation players moving forward, but the player development present in Bloomington makes that a reasonable possibility.

Filed to:

  • IUMIKE1

    Agree, there is no substitute for actual game time minutes. If given in large doses even minutes when the game has already been decided or is well on the way to being that is more beneficial than most any practice minutes in the case for these two, especially HP. Meaningful minutes against the other teams top players is, of course, the best case scenario for development. This is why I couldn’t understand it when people said that their suspensions weren’t that big of a deal cause they would be back before the conference schedule started.

  • IUMIKE1

    8 to 10, “quality”, minutes from HP next year is probably a best case scenario I would say and I could live with that especially if we seen slow, but continued improvement as the season progressed. With the hops and wingspan that HP has I would really like for him to become that weak side shot blocker that helps teams that play average to decent D to become a team that, to a certain extent, is better on D simply by having that. That in itself would go a long way in him seeing quality minutes and being a consistent contributor. Averaging 8 to 10 minutes of any kind in pre-conference would be a pretty big step for PJ at this point I’d say. That could possibly allow him to play a similar role to what HP played this year and that is probably a best case scenario for PJ. If CZ returns and the incoming players make the kind of impact that all of us want he may very well decide to transfer. If both of those things happen and he doesn’t transfer playing even less minutes in the pre-conference schedule and very limited number of meaningful minutes after that is probably a best case scenario for him. Maybe it’s cause it seems like we have been bitten so hard by the injury bug for the last couple of years, but I just can’t seem to shake the feeling that PJ is going to be one of those kids that have some kind of injury almost all of the time or at least enough of the time that it will keep him from practicing and just playing enough in general for us to ever be able to see what his real possibilities are. Hope like hell I”m wrong on that one for his sake and IU’s.

  • IUMIKE1

    I’ve really got to start reading all of the comments before I post. I just made myself look like I did the middle school book report thing where I read yours and just changed some of the words, put in some more words, (in my case a lot more words) and retyped it. LOL

  • You are forgetting Stanford, I think he will add some needed depth in the backcourt.

  • calbert40

    Great minds think alike, Mike!

  • IUMIKE1

    Let’s hope that’s the case for both our sakes. lol

  • True – especially if the rumor transfers are correct

  • I think that is one of two major problems I have with Crean’s game-day coaching. Why keep your starters in when you are up twenty? It shows a lack of respect for your bench and frankly a lack of respect for your own recruiting! (My other major problem is how they got syched out of the Syracuse game because of a defensive scheme. Louisville can break down the zone, and so could IU. C’mon!)