Iup basketball

[IUPbigINDIANS]

The last 4 years have been high hopes and disappointment. The 2019-2020 team before Demo got hurt - maybe one of the best teams ever at IUP, the lost season, losing shawndale but making final 4 without him, then last year. THis year was set up to be good too, but Tomiwa left to play 10 minutes a game at Towson, So yeah, bad luck happens to everyone, but it makes a bigger difference when you're expectations are high.

Speaking of Tomiwa ...

Well, I'll leave it at that.

I'll just say a little birdie thinks he may be back next year.

His bad influence isn't here anymore, which should help.

[ironmaniup]

The December version of last year's team would have beat the March version by 25 points.

The how and why has been beat to death but what that team morphed into was hard to watch.

The last 4 years have been high hopes and disappointment. The 2019-2020 team before Demo got hurt - maybe one of the best teams ever at IUP, the lost season, losing shawndale but making final 4 without him, then last year. THis year was set up to be good too, but Tomiwa left to play 10 minutes a game at Towson, So yeah, bad luck happens to everyone, but it makes a bigger difference when you're expectations are high.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Interesting point about last year’s 32-2 team and I felt the same way. It was like they were flying with a blown engine and we knew that the other one was going to blow as well before reaching the ultimate destination. Then…crash.

The December version of last year's team would have beat the March version by 25 points.

The how and why has been beat to death but what that team morphed into was hard to watch.

[EyeoftheHawk]

If anything it makes for a wild ride. You don't know what to expect from game to game.

They appear to have avoided another catastrophic injury with Petteno. With a bye date Saturday he should be ready to roll next Wednesday.

This team is actually more fun to watch than last year. It sounds odd but that was the hardest 32-2 team to watch -- especially in the second half of the season.

Interesting point about last year’s 32-2 team and I felt the same way. It was like they were flying with a blown engine and we knew that the other one was going to blow as well before reaching the ultimate destination. Then…crash.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Good description. Star players can make a huge difference in basketball. If you want a great example of that, all you have to do is look at how the loss of two players, Ariel Jones and Lauren Pettis, have basically changed Ship's women's team from one of the best in the region to one occupying the nether regions of the PSAC East this year. The Ship men's team is suffering because it is largely made up of players who would be good sixth or seventh players off the bench, but struggle to be consistently outstanding over 40 minutes.

IUP has had a great run of success and a lot of places would certainly take the "down" year you're having currently as opposed to what they are contending with. There is something to be said for beating the teams you should beat, which is what IUP is doing this year. But as you point out, it usually takes a team that runs at least seven deep to run the table against the top dogs. The loss of Dillard, and the benching of other players have made the Hawks essentially a four-man team at this point. Kind of reminds me of the 19-9 Ship team of last season. Four good to great players and not much in reserve.

If anything it makes for a wild ride. You don't know what to expect from game to game.

They appear to have avoided another catastrophic injury with Petteno. With a bye date Saturday he should be ready to roll next Wednesday.

This team is actually more fun to watch than last year. It sounds odd but that was the hardest 32-2 team to watch -- especially in the second half of the season.

[Ship69]

Keep in mind Joe is 14-6, BUT he's 1-6 against top teams. The one win came with Dallis Dillard.

I think he has the best 'average' team in the league.

Now, if he'd play his roster correctly, I think they could be very dangerous to a top team on a given night.

He has two legit stars in Garvin and EP. Those two went for like 55 last night The supporting cast is what it is. Radford has lit up some teams but vanished against Cal and Gannon.


My point is Joe can beat (has beat) all the second and third tier teams he's played - even with the SF debacle. The rotation he is playing now, however, isn't going to take down a heavyweight.

Good description. Star players can make a huge difference in basketball. If you want a great example of that, all you have to do is look at how the loss of two players, Ariel Jones and Lauren Pettis, have basically changed Ship's women's team from one of the best in the region to one occupying the nether regions of the PSAC East this year. The Ship men's team is suffering because it is largely made up of players who would be good sixth or seventh players off the bench, but struggle to be consistently outstanding over 40 minutes.

IUP has had a great run of success and a lot of places would certainly take the "down" year you're having currently as opposed to what they are contending with. There is something to be said for beating the teams you should beat, which is what IUP is doing this year. But as you point out, it usually takes a team that runs at least seven deep to run the table against the top dogs. The loss of Dillard, and the benching of other players have made the Hawks essentially a four-man team at this point. Kind of reminds me of the 19-9 Ship team of last season. Four good to great players and not much in reserve.

[IUPalum]

Serious question:

What do you think Joe is seeing that we’re not? We’re fans and followers that aren’t college basketball coaches, let alone winning more than 400 games with an almost 80% win percentage and a full trophy case. Despite the proven track record and accolades, we see what we think are flaws, particularly related to playing time and rotations, that he either doesn’t see or just views differently. I know basketball to an extent but have never played or coached yet it seems obvious to me that Brooks should be on the floor a lot more than he is, and that KJ should be on the floor a lot less. There’s no doubt that KJ brings a lot of energy and hustles every second that he’s out there, but the talent gap between him and Brooks and others that aren’t playing seems significant.

If it was an issue behind the scenes and Brooks was in the dog house, he probably wouldn’t play at all. If it’s a lack of effort or poor performance in practice, I don’t think that is a good enough reason to not play a kid. I’ve coached football and baseball and every single team had a player or two that weren’t necessarily good practice players but when the uniform was on they were high performers. I’ve also seen great practice players that couldn’t carry the same level of play into games. It’s not just Brooks either. We’ve seen very little of Lambert or Waldo who I think both should be getting a few minutes, especially in a year when the team is already short handed and there are minutes available. This supports IUPbigIndians’ notion that Joe doesn’t develop his bench.

So how in the hell is he winning at the rate he does? I thought this year’s team was going to be under .500 even with Dillard, but they’re going to end well over that without him. It’s not always pretty, but they’re winning somehow and hanging in there with teams like Cal that are far better. I don’t care much about margin of victory and there were times last night when it got tighter than it probably should have, but they won a conference game on the road with a depleted roster.

How’s he doing it? What are we missing looking from the outside in?

I can tell you this much, I coach MS through HS level and I wouldn't recommend KJ to a top tier D2 program. He's slow, uncoordinated and can't shoot a lick. Yes, he hustles but that only gets you so far.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Serious question:

What do you think Joe is seeing that we’re not? We’re fans and followers that aren’t college basketball coaches, let alone winning more than 400 games with an almost 80% win percentage and a full trophy case. Despite the proven track record and accolades, we see what we think are flaws, particularly related to playing time and rotations, that he either doesn’t see or just views differently. I know basketball to an extent but have never played or coached yet it seems obvious to me that Brooks should be on the floor a lot more than he is, and that KJ should be on the floor a lot less. There’s no doubt that KJ brings a lot of energy and hustles every second that he’s out there, but the talent gap between him and Brooks and others that aren’t playing seems significant.

If it was an issue behind the scenes and Brooks was in the dog house, he probably wouldn’t play at all. If it’s a lack of effort or poor performance in practice, I don’t think that is a good enough reason to not play a kid. I’ve coached football and baseball and every single team had a player or two that weren’t necessarily good practice players but when the uniform was on they were high performers. I’ve also seen great practice players that couldn’t carry the same level of play into games. It’s not just Brooks either. We’ve seen very little of Lambert or Waldo who I think both should be getting a few minutes, especially in a year when the team is already short handed and there are minutes available. This supports IUPbigIndians’ notion that Joe doesn’t develop his bench.

So how in the hell is he winning at the rate he does? I thought this year’s team was going to be under .500 even with Dillard, but they’re going to end well over that without him. It’s not always pretty, but they’re winning somehow and hanging in there with teams like Cal that are far better. I don’t care much about margin of victory and there were times last night when it got tighter than it probably should have, but they won a conference game on the road with a depleted roster.

How’s he doing it? What are we missing looking from the outside in?

Keep in mind Joe is 14-6, BUT he's 1-6 against top teams. The one win came with Dallis Dillard.

I think he has the best 'average' team in the league.

Now, if he'd play his roster correctly, I think they could be very dangerous to a top team on a given night.

He has two legit stars in Garvin and EP. Those two went for like 55 last night The supporting cast is what it is. Radford has lit up some teams but vanished against Cal and Gannon.


My point is Joe can beat (has beat) all the second and third tier teams he's played - even with the SF debacle. The rotation he is playing now, however, isn't going to take down a heavyweight.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

So Brooks got benched at Gannon after 3 quick turnovers. my take is that its a mental discipline problem, and he has problems handling the ball against aggressive defenses. He makes a ton of mistakes under pressure, maybe doesn't follow instructions in tense moments. I don't know, but I think Joe decides how much to play him based on the opponent. Clarion was a good team for his abilities. Sure you could say his athleticism makes it worth the risk, will never know.

Going along with that theory, though, doesn't explain KJ playing over Petteno (who is better on both ends).

KJ is good for several boneheaded plays a game and gets waxed on defense nightly. He's also too small to play down there and gets physically moved out of position constantly.

I don't see any possible scenario I can be sold on KJ playing ahead of Petteno or Brooks.

I'd like to see:

Brooks 20 mins
Petteno 15 mins
KJ 5 mins


Brooks had better stats in 11 mins than KJ had in 29 last night. Think about that. Brooks is also a beast at the point of that 1-2-2 press. Fast. Huge leaping. Long arms.

The biggest thing, by far, is teams pay attention to Brooks and Petteno. They ignore KJ and double EP. Brooks is also a great **** blocker and causes hesitation by teams to drive the lane.

Joe mixed friends and business. Bad combination. Unfortunately I think that's the answer to the question. Nothing else makes sense to the entire building.

[ironmaniup]

Serious question:

What do you think Joe is seeing that we’re not? We’re fans and followers that aren’t college basketball coaches, let alone winning more than 400 games with an almost 80% win percentage and a full trophy case. Despite the proven track record and accolades, we see what we think are flaws, particularly related to playing time and rotations, that he either doesn’t see or just views differently. I know basketball to an extent but have never played or coached yet it seems obvious to me that Brooks should be on the floor a lot more than he is, and that KJ should be on the floor a lot less. There’s no doubt that KJ brings a lot of energy and hustles every second that he’s out there, but the talent gap between him and Brooks and others that aren’t playing seems significant.

If it was an issue behind the scenes and Brooks was in the dog house, he probably wouldn’t play at all. If it’s a lack of effort or poor performance in practice, I don’t think that is a good enough reason to not play a kid. I’ve coached football and baseball and every single team had a player or two that weren’t necessarily good practice players but when the uniform was on they were high performers. I’ve also seen great practice players that couldn’t carry the same level of play into games. It’s not just Brooks either. We’ve seen very little of Lambert or Waldo who I think both should be getting a few minutes, especially in a year when the team is already short handed and there are minutes available. This supports IUPbigIndians’ notion that Joe doesn’t develop his bench.

So how in the hell is he winning at the rate he does? I thought this year’s team was going to be under .500 even with Dillard, but they’re going to end well over that without him. It’s not always pretty, but they’re winning somehow and hanging in there with teams like Cal that are far better. I don’t care much about margin of victory and there were times last night when it got tighter than it probably should have, but they won a conference game on the road with a depleted roster.

How’s he doing it? What are we missing looking from the outside in?

So Brooks got benched at Gannon after 3 quick turnovers. my take is that its a mental discipline problem, and he has problems handling the ball against aggressive defenses. He makes a ton of mistakes under pressure, maybe doesn't follow instructions in tense moments. I don't know, but I think Joe decides how much to play him based on the opponent. Clarion was a good team for his abilities. Sure you could say his athleticism makes it worth the risk, will never know.

[EyeoftheHawk]

Serious question:

What do you think Joe is seeing that we’re not? We’re fans and followers that aren’t college basketball coaches, let alone winning more than 400 games with an almost 80% win percentage and a full trophy case. Despite the proven track record and accolades, we see what we think are flaws, particularly related to playing time and rotations, that he either doesn’t see or just views differently. I know basketball to an extent but have never played or coached yet it seems obvious to me that Brooks should be on the floor a lot more than he is, and that KJ should be on the floor a lot less. There’s no doubt that KJ brings a lot of energy and hustles every second that he’s out there, but the talent gap between him and Brooks and others that aren’t playing seems significant.

If it was an issue behind the scenes and Brooks was in the dog house, he probably wouldn’t play at all. If it’s a lack of effort or poor performance in practice, I don’t think that is a good enough reason to not play a kid. I’ve coached football and baseball and every single team had a player or two that weren’t necessarily good practice players but when the uniform was on they were high performers. I’ve also seen great practice players that couldn’t carry the same level of play into games. It’s not just Brooks either. We’ve seen very little of Lambert or Waldo who I think both should be getting a few minutes, especially in a year when the team is already short handed and there are minutes available. This supports IUPbigIndians’ notion that Joe doesn’t develop his bench.

So how in the hell is he winning at the rate he does? I thought this year’s team was going to be under .500 even with Dillard, but they’re going to end well over that without him. It’s not always pretty, but they’re winning somehow and hanging in there with teams like Cal that are far better. I don’t care much about margin of victory and there were times last night when it got tighter than it probably should have, but they won a conference game on the road with a depleted roster.

How’s he doing it? What are we missing looking from the outside in?

[IUPalum]

I'd guess he was dressed for an emergency-only role. Looked like his wrist was still heavily taped up.

KJ sucking ass must not be an emergency.

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Petteno dressed and no run?

I'd guess he was dressed for an emergency-only role. Looked like his wrist was still heavily taped up.

[IUPalum]

Petteno dressed and no run?

[IUPbigINDIANS]

Any win with this remaining roster is a good win. But, tonight shouldn't have been close. Joe needed to drop the hammer rather than subbing constantly. IUP had several chances to bust that game wide open.

Stewart vanishing to the pine in the second half was mind-boggling.

Damir played great when he was in. Shocker. As soon as he'd go out, Clarion would go on a run. Clock work. He literally altered everything Clarion did. How the big guy can't see that is amazing. He had some massive blocks and rebounds. I feel bad for him. He's a legit starter in this league and at minimum should be playing 25-26 mpg.

Bryce pulling up for an NBA trey on a 2 on 1 break (while up just two points with two minutes to play) was insane. Naturally nothing but net. But, wowsers. Balls of steel in that moment. Had he missed, he may have called an Uber to get home.

Garvin had another amazing game. Ethan, too.

Clarion was vastly bigger, deeper, faster and way more athletic than IUP. They just have some real sloppy stretches that kill them. That team is nearly all freshmen and sophomores. They're coming. Next year may be the breakout.