The Minute After: SIU-Edwardsville

  • 12/17/2010 9:40 pm in

Thoughts on a 88-54 win over SIU-Edwardsville:

When you win by 30-plus and your opponent doesn’t hit a field goal until the 7:05 mark in the first half — which, yeesh — sometimes there’s not much to say.

A dominant win is a dominant win.

But there were a few Hoosiers given more opportunity to shine this evening, and hopefully they gained a little confidence heading into this next stretch, where, including tonight, Indiana will play four games in the seven days.

A quick look:

+ Derek Elston blazed out to a quick 10 points to start the game, and finished with a season-high 14 (5-of-8 from the field, 1-of-2 from three, 1-of-1 from the line) to go along with five rebounds in 19 minutes of play. He also made a couple nice passes.

Good to see. When he gets the minutes, he’s shown he can produce.

With the Hoosiers often struggling to get scoring production out of the frontline, hopefully Elston can build on tonight’s performance.

+ Matt Roth played a season-high 20 minutes and though he didn’t get a ton of looks, he converted on his opportunities (1-of-1 from the field, 1-of-1 from three, 2-of-2 from the line).

This team likes the 3-point shot, and it’s Roth’s strength. With the amount of fouls the Hoosiers often rack up, his name may be called at some point this season, so getting some game experience tonight is a plus.

Two other points of note:

+ I know SIU-Edwardsville didn’t match the Hoosiers’ talent level, but Indiana shooting 61.5 percent from the field (32-of-53), 56.3 percent from three (9-of-16) and 75 percent from the line (15-of-20)  is an impressive showing no matter the opponent. This team continues to shoot the ball well, and it should hopefully be a key part of their repertoire heading into Big Ten season.

+ But of course, as we’ve seen many times this season, turnovers were again at issue. Seventeen of them tonight against an opponent of this caliber isn’t anything to write home about. But it looks like it’s a weakness of this team we’re just going to have to live with if they can’t right the ship on it soon.

Filed to:

  • Anonymous

    I thought Will and Victor’s dunks would highlight my night, but then I got to shake hands with Osterman.

  • Anonymous

    Sheehey continues to impress with solid play.

    Elston was lights out. Early in the game, in four consecutive plays he had:

    – 3pt shot
    – def rebound
    – assist
    – took a charge

  • Not much to complain about from this one, other than: Elston needs to show up like he did tonight more often! This is the Elston I knew from last season and have been waiting for all year. Outstanding play. Liked the dunks at the end, Sheehey is an awesome player, not as “flashy” as Oladipo, but makes smart moves and has the ENERGY!
    Been too long without an IU game to watch, looking forward to Sundays matchup

  • HoosierDavey

    You NEVER see 24-0 on the scoreboard against anyone, so that was an impressive start. If Crean doesn’t give the subs significant minutes and doesn’t experiment with different lineups and such (like Creek at the point), we probably beat them by 50.

  • Marsh21

    Didn’t get to see the game but its good to hear Elston had a good night. I’ve said since the beginning of the year Elston will make the difference between a so so year and a good year for this team. We need his effort and offensive play because it will cause other teams to show some respect and not double up on our 1 or 2 offensive threats on the floor.

    I would love to see Crean start running some set plays for Elston and get him involved early. We waited until the end of the year last season before we saw the Elston we knew was coming. Hopefully Crean will get some confidence and put him in position to score.

  • Anonymous

    A few musings…

    1.) When is the last time the IU football team got out to a 24-0 lead?
    2.) Anyone clamoring for Victor to log minutes at the point needs to be quiet, at least for the time being. He is dynamic, but he is not (at least at this point of his career,) anywhere close to being prepared to handle the ball a majority of the time. I’m not sure the team should have committed 5 turnovers in this game, much less 5 by one player.
    3.) How bad is Kennesaw St? They lost to these guys!
    4.) Elston was doing everything. I’m sure someone will ask why he came out when he was so hot. I saw him as he went to bench and he looked like he was about to die, so that would be why. I do think he should have returned to the game sooner because he basically lost his momentum. Not that he played badly at any point, but when a dude’s going off like he was let him go!
    5.) Four offensive rebounds should be a cause for concern…but it’s not when you only missed 20 shots the whole game.
    6.) Of the 11 people who scored, all but one (Korey Barnett with his lone 3-pointer) had at least 5. That’s good balance. Pair that with the balance of playing time, as Creek (23 minutes,) and Oladipo (21) were the only two guys to play over half the game.
    7.) How the hell does Watford foul out of this game? He could have scored 40 against this team, he had no business getting 5 fouls.
    8.) Yet another solid performance for JR.

  • Anonymous

    A little harsh!

    GO IU!!!!!!!!!!

  • Aceman_Mujezinovic_07

    Elston was 3-3 from the foul line by my count. Now, I’m long winded so I’ll try to shorten this:

    Good things:
    1) I saw CTC rip Pritchard once and TP took it well. It seemed to be about the FT’s because I saw CTC say “Free Throws”.
    2) I saw CTC talking to JR and JR said something that was obviously funny and they both laughed. That’s a different JR than last year when he argued and whined to coach.
    3) Nice to see Elston put together a good stretch or two.
    4) WILL SHEEHEY IS GOING TO BE GOOD!!!!! – I hate to do this because it’s a pUKe player but he’s seriously starting to remind me of Rex Chapman. If his shot improves a little he will have a very similar skill set and he’s even a little stronger than Rex was as a freshman.
    5) Nice to see the Vic at PG thoughts put to rest. He beats the crap out of the ball while dribbling.
    6) Good to see Creek make a couple athletic plays (a couple drives, a floater, an athletic rebound).
    7) Nice to see TP at least look at the basket – he’s 0-6 from the line this year which shows a fear of shooting. A banger should shoot more FT’s than that just by getting junk put backs and loose balls and being fouled.

    The Bad:
    1) I’m starting to agree with Stoni that the fouling is ridiculous. We put a team who couldn’t shoot worth a sh** in the bonus with 10:40 to go in the first half and all of our fouls were stupid non-shooting fouls, evidenced by the fact that they didn’t shoot a FT until we put them in the bonus.
    2) Staying on the stupid foul thing, how could CW foul out in a game like this? Use your feet NOT your hands!
    3) No Verdell but that could be a good thing – there’s no reason for him to play (now or Sunday).
    4) Vic’s TO’s
    5) Hulls still passing up a few opportunities to shoot.
    6) SIUE – man they were terrible!

    Despite the pathetic schedule, I think this team has grown as a team and is much improved. So much so, that I wouldn’t be surprised to see them go to Vegas and win both games by double-digits. Of course at this point in the rebuilding process I wouldn’t be surprised by two losses either.

  • BornHoosierFan

    I hear a lot of hype on here about Oladipo and why not? He’s a human highlight reel and I love his potential as well, but I believe that Sheehey could make more of an impact in his career at IU than Oladipo. He is long, super athletic and has a good motor. Furthurmore this was probably the first dissapointing game that I have seen from Oladipo…..he played like a Freshmen

  • Anonymous

    I’m sorry you feel this way. However as a true Hoosier fan you need to watch these games and really get a good feel for where they are and how far they have come as team. I think we all would agree that the competition has not been great however the confidence that is being built just by simply winning has been great for the players and fans. As you watch them win this year you can see the cohesiveness being built by the players. Practice is what you want to see then simply consider these games as a practice. Do you think that watching them lose to Duke, Kentucky, Kansas, Florida etc. would be more enjoyable for you? Not sure about you but I have watched every game since Crean arrived (all that were available to me) and I have endured some heartache and headaches. So for me to see them win and have a little fun while doing so has been a huge lift for me. As a fan growing up on the knee of my dad watching the games I know that no matter the competition or the outcome of the games/season you always love IU and support the team. Not watching by choice means not supporting in my opinion. Not saying you’re not a fan but come on more than ever before in IU’s history they need us the fans to create excitement and enthusiasm. I don’t know maybe I’m crazy or out of line here.

  • Anonymous

    I agree with everything here. Turnovers are one stat that has no prejudice. Against SIUE or against Michigan St., they hurt just the same. You cannot turn the ball over 18 times against a team of this calliber. As far as Watford fouling out, I understand that he had some unique matchups against some smaller guys but that’s what he was brought here to do be a matchup nightmare for opponets….that means on both sides of the ball

  • Anonymous

    I hear you, cupcakes aren’t that exciting. But it is important for these guys to run their offense against opponents that don’t know their sets.

    Even with your narrow minded viewpoint, you still forgot about the win vs. Evansville. They beat Butler at Hinkle.

  • Anonymous

    If you have read any of my recent posts, you have seen me suggest that Oladipo, Elston and Sheehey should be playing 18-20 minutes/game. I said we would likely see 8-10 points and 4-6 rebounds/game from each one of them. The results are in: Oladipo 8 pts, 6 reb, 21 min; Elston 14 pts, 5 reb, 19 min; Sheehey 8 pts, 4 reb, 19 min. These three can play. Keep them on the court!

  • Anonymous

    And Evansville, which beat Butler at Hinkle,

  • Anonymous

    C’mon Loop, let’s not have the same argument again. You’re making a mountain out of a molehill with these guys vs. a vastly inferior opponent.

    Don’t get me wrong, I do appreciate what each player brings to the table. But we’ve yet to see it against real competition on a consistent basis.

    Let’s put the love fest into context after the UNI and New Mexico/Colorado games.

  • Anonymous

    You can say anything that you want. But the fact remains this is the first game that all three got the minutes, and they produced exactly what I predicted. Keep playing each 20 minutes a game, and IU will be a MUCH stronger team!

  • Aceman_Mujezinovic_07

    I have to disagree with you on one point. Elston’s ppm and rpm suggest that if he averaged 24 minutes instead of 12 (although that mpg number has increased the past couple games) he would also average 8-10 ppg and 4-6 rpg. His numbers per minute were very similar last year and we saw what he could do against B10 competition the last quarter of the season.

    I think the argument with Will and Vic is more subjective (Elston’s being objective). They are freshman and I don’t think they are Selby/Irving type freshman so I think they are capable of putting up a 14/6 line one night against a good competitor and then posting a 6/2 against weaker competition. They’re going to have more freshman mistakes and so their stats would probably be a bit less consistent.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t remember Rex playing that much defense, but maybe that’s just the UK hatred clouding my memory.

  • Anonymous

    Thankfully we’ll be playing more transitional D1 schools the rest of the year….oh wait, never mind. The Big 10 season’s starting in a few weeks. Crap, time to tighten the rotation to play the big boys again.

    Let me clear up the facts for you: all three played 20 minutes because the outcome was essentially decided in the first half. Elston did his thing and I don’t dispute that he deserves 20+ minutes moving forward as long as his defensive awareness and willingness to bang wit the big boys improves.

    But there aren’t enough minutes to go around for our guards. Figure there are 200 minutes total per game (5 players x 40 minutes), of which 120 are played by guards (3-guard lineup). What follows is a breakdown for how minutes look to be distributed based on Crean’s substitution pattern when everyone is healthy against the likes of Evansville/BC/UK (i.e. real competition, NOT cupcakes).

    30 – Hulls
    30 – Jones
    25 – Creek
    25 – Rivers
    10 – VO/Sheehey

    Now if Jones continues to be slowed by the ankle or Creek just can’t seem to regain his form, then obviously our freshmen will get more opportunities.

  • Anonymous

    There actually is a difference between a fact-Oladipo played 21 min, Elston played 19 min, and Sheehey played 19 min, and your opinion: “because…” I have pointed these numbers out before, but in 200 min there is lots of room for 20 min each for Oladipo, Elston, and Sheehey: Watford 29, Jones 25, Creek 21, Hulls 28 (all exactly what they were averaging for the first 9 games), Rivers 17 (down from 20.5), Oladipo 20, Elston 20, Sheehey 20, Pritchard 13 (down from 17), Capo 7 = 200. Roth and Moore would be at 0-or take minutes from individual players who were hurt or ineffective during a specific game..

  • Anonymous

    And your logic of course is feasible moving forward assuming we aren’t part of the Big Ten. Your average minutes per game stat, while useful in the short term, takes into account that we had 7 double digit victories.

    Take a look at the avg. minutes per game played vs. Evansville/BC/UK:

    Sheehey – 7.5

    Oladipo – 17 (VO played 23, an outlier, vs. UK due to VIII’s injury and Creek’s foul trouble)

    Elston – 13 (didn’t play vs, Evansville, but agreed that he’ll play 20-25)

    This is a small sample size obviously (n=3 games), but for directional purposes against solid basketball programs, the conclusion is that Crean will not have a evenly spread rotation among our guards. It’s great that we have depth (something we didn’t have last season), but the average minutes per game through the first 9 games as a whole is not indicative of the team’s future competition and therefore cannot be used to create inferences about what makes this team successful (i.e. more playing time for VO/Sheehey means less for Jones/Creek/Hulls).

  • Anonymous

    You confuse the fact that no prediction will be an accurate predictor of a specific future game with the fact that my minute projections are based upon the numbers for all 9 games (at the time I wrote) with my suggestions for more playing time for Oladipo, Elston, and Sheehey. You use the best objective data you have as your beginning. Today, Roth already made a good case for him getting more minutes. But let’s see how he defends, rebounds, and does at ball security against some more teams.

  • Anonymous

    I’m not really sure what the first sentence means, though I understood the part about Roth. Assuming Rivers is healthy (crossing my fingers) I just don’t see a evenly split of minutes being distributed across all five guards like you want (potentially 6 with Roth).

    I guess we can only agree to disagree at this stage and agree that Crean has a good problem on his hands.