So yeah, the past few weeks — the Michigan game, then the Illinois debacle, and so on — have been pretty depressing. It’s enough to challenge one’s sanity. Why am I watching this team? What’s the point? Do I really not care about Indiana basketball?

Of course I do, and the Hoosiers’ game against Minnesota proved why: They’re getting there. It might not happen on the road, and it might not happen soon, but IU will win a Big Ten game, and it will be awesome.

Until then there’s not a lot to analyze, really. The Hoosiers are just as bad as they look. They’re inefficient offensively because they turn the ball over like crazy. They allow far too many open looks, they don’t have the size to match up, they’re inexperienced, and so forth. There are only so many ways to write that brilliant batch of analysis you just read without getting sick of writing it, let alone reading it. But at one point, I now feel confident in saying, the stars will align, the opposing team won’t knock down those shots, the game will come down to the last few plays, and the Hoosiers won’t turn the ball over, or miss a free throw, or do something utterly erratic that boggles the mind and makes one throw a pillow at the opposite couch. They’ll complete that pass; they’ll make that shot; they’ll avoid weirdness. And they’ll win.

It will be short-lived and it might only be one game. But like I said: It will be awesome.

BRIEF, UNIMPORTANT MISCELLANY:

Without this turning into one of those gawd-awful notes columns some writers still do (Unfortunately Mike Downey retired from the Chicago Tribune; I so miss his wacky observations about American Idol and kids these days!), some random periphery stuff:

– The Indy Star’s always-interesting, always-verbose (really, though, who am I to talk?) Terry Hutchens is asking today why Devan Dumes wasn’t in the game down the stretch, even with his foul issues, which was hard not to notice during the game. It was made more obvious by Dumes taking that last three, which appeared to be a play set up for Matt Roth on a double screen. Roth was too slow getting around, Minnesota defended it well, and it was left to Dumes to take one of his wild-but-somehow-still-occasionally-goes-in 3-pointers. So, where was Dumes? And to a larger point, as a commenter noted under Alex’s wrap yesterday, are Tom Crean’s substitution patterns a teensy bit unreliable?

I don’t really have an answer, not only because it’s not something I’ve really noticed but I’m sort of hesitant to question how Crean could better maximize this team’s limited human capital. There’s not a lot of wiggle room there; they’re just bad, and he knows it. Tinkering too much with the Hoosiers’ lineup is a little like a fly adjusting its above-highway flight by a few inches. Recalibrate all you want, but that truck’s windshield is still coming.

– People actually showed up! To the game! And wore the right color shirt! And got to keep that shirt! And the shirt had a Winston Churchill quote on it! This is a win-win for everyone; as long as tickets remain $5 and t-shirts remain plentiful, maybe the Hoosiers can keep that attendance ticking in this, our year of recession (both athletic and economic).

Lowering cost, matching price to demand — sounds like a smart business strategy to me. But then my only business course was in sixth grade, when I played Lemonade Stand on my Apple IIE at study hall.

– Early in the game, it was evident that Kelvin Sampson not only gave Eric Gordon the green light — Sampson went ahead and told everyone on the team not to be bashful, which made for an entertaining opening five minutes. Gordon got his fair diet of shots, and was never hesitant. Neither was Armon Bassett. Those shots came early in the shot clock, from a variety of distances, thanks not only to Longwood’s inept defense but to a seemingly conscious choice by IU. This might foretell a change in strategy from Sampson — the coach is notorious for his plodding, defensive Oklahoma teams — but for now we can still safely consider it an aberration.

— As a whole, IU’s offense felt more cohesive. DeAndre Thomas (who started in place of Lance Stemler; more on this below) opened the game with a strong move in the post and made it clear the Hoosiers intended to drive the ball low throughout the game. They did so, incorporating D.J. White well (until Sampson took him off the floor for most of the second half), and when post possessions failed, White and Thomas rotated the ball well. Altogether, the offense felt more together; shooters relocated efficiently; passes were more decisively and accurately delivered; and on the whole the half-court game looked and felt like it had been through a thoroughly productive week of practice. At the same time …

– … The procilivity for early-possession shots led to a lot of fast break baskets for Longwood. Longwood’s shooters looked drastically undermatched, but anytime the team was able to grab up a long rebound, it usually led to a quality shot in transition. Against a more proficient offensive team (i.e. one that doesn’t chuck radically misfired three-pointers every third touch), IU would have yielded many more baskets. I’m all for a free-flowing, Phoenix Suns-esque system, but only if it is defensively capable as well. That’s an incredibly difficult thing to do, so it’s all but certain that Sampson will slow this team down in the future. Still, those fast breaks and quick possessions make this team even more enjoyable to watch. (For more on one of IU’s lingering defensive deficiencies — backcuts and slipped screens — check out Big A’s latest film session.)

– Lance Stemler played … OK? He was the topic of much discussion round these parts this week — most of it centered on quasi-off-court issues — but on the court it’s clear that Stemler just doesn’t have all that much confidence. I won’t get carried away over his second half performance; again, it’s Longwood, and I don’t even think Adam Ahlfeld was watching much of the second half. (Actually, Ahlfeld was actually playing, which says everything you need to know right there.) Stemler should definitely be starting the game on the bench; Sampson alluded to this strategy as a matter of helping Lance fight pressure, but it boils down more to pure economics. When on, Lance is a shooter, but IU has shooters in abundance. What the Hoosiers need is solid play and physicality from the off-post position. DeAndre Thomas may or may not be the answer, but right now Stemler is pure, ineffective surplus, a surplus that reaches its point of diminishing returns nearly every time Stemler touches the ball.

– It doesn’t really bear repeating because it’s so obvious, but yeah: Eric Gordon = really good at basketball.

– One final thought: Yesterday, Terry Hutchens kind-of-sort-of questioned and then affirmed the merit of playing a team like Longwood, a team so clearly inept that, as I have been reciting, almost nothing of permanent value can be garnered from watching. As unhelpful as the games are to watch, though, I agree with Sampson’s rebuff of Hutch: These games are helpful from a player’s standpoint. I think it’s vitally important for a team to see what things look like when success is coming easy; that happens so rarely against good teams, even in wins, that cupcakes like Longwood are the only early-season chances coaches have to demonstrate to their players at live speed the way things should look. Obviously, like any good diet, balance is important, and too many cupcakes will make you slow and fat and sluggish when it comes time for greater challenges, like making this metaphor coherent. But for now, easy success is a-OK.

That’s it for this week. As always, your thoughts, additions and rebuffs of your own in the comments.