Commentary

The tragic deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery are just the latest examples of an appalling truth: for reasons both blatant and insidious, race remains one of the fundamental factors that influences a person’s experience as an American.

It should not still be this way.

We have come a long way from our original sin as a nation, but our progress remains too little, too late, and too exclusive.

To be clear: this is not an anti-American sentiment. It is an anti-racism and anti-oppression sentiment. And only those with craven and malevolent visions for the future of this nation conflate the two.

The United States of America is a great but flawed country. Our country’s history, policies, and practices — especially concerning matters of race — often haven’t matched its lofty ideals. That’s an unfortunate truth, and it has led to the systemic oppression of so many of our brothers and sisters. But that’s not a reason to stop trying to live up to those ideals.

Those who feel complacent in the face of continued racial strife — or worse, revel in it — reveal themselves as indifferent to those American ideals.

But those who love this country, who believe in its ideals and who feel love for all of its citizens, will feel a combination of anguish, shame, and resolve when we collectively fail to live up to those ideals. And those who love this country will attempt to be an active part of the solution rather than a bystander.

Our team here at The Assembly Call loves our country, which is why we feel compelled to speak out during this time, as our nation’s deepest wounds are being ripped open.

So to all who are protesting for justice and equality for African Americans: we are with you. We support you. We support your cause.

We support equality and justice for all people, but in a country that has implicitly and explicitly attached different values to different lives, we feel it is both necessary and productive to state affirmatively that #BlackLivesMatter.

And while we hate to see looting and the destruction of property, especially by those who are doing so just to stoke hate and confusion, we also recognize the words of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., who said, “A riot is the language of the unheard.” We seek to listen and understand before we judge and condemn, and we urge others to do the same.

The four of us have had the benefit of living in the United States as white men. We’ve all had individual struggles in our lives, but none of us has ever had to fear the wrath of racism, battle systemic oppression, or wonder if our life actually mattered to the country we call home.

We can’t know what that feels like, but we can empathize with those who do — like many of the African American players who have donned the Cream and Crimson for Indiana University.

These are young men we have supported and critiqued over the years on our show, but they are far more than basketball players. They are our brothers. And they are valued for far more than what they produce on a Tuesday night in Assembly Hall.

Their lives matter, not because of what they do, but because of who they are. They are humans, just like us, and just like you. And all humans deserve to be treated fairly and equally, with dignity and compassion.

Basketball seems so trivial when compared to matters of life, liberty, and opportunity. These are fundamental ideals that are so easy for some of us to take for granted, yet others feel as if they have no recourse but to take to the streets and fight for them.

We stand on the side of life, liberty and equality for all. We believe in equal opportunity, and we want to use whatever voice we have to help fight for it.

To that end, we have each individually donated to the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which fights for racial justice through litigation, advocacy, and public education. This includes the Thurgood Marshall Institute, which focuses on research and targeted advocacy campaigns. (The NAACP has an A- rating from CharityWatch.org.)

We hope you’ll stand with us.

— Jerod, Andy, Ryan, and Coach

Photo by Micheile Henderson on Unsplash

I didn’t set out to write this post.

But after perusing our KenPom page for different reasons the last few days, I haven’t be able to avoid seeing two stats that, to my eyes, tell the story for why this team went 9-11 in conference play as opposed to 10-10, 11-9, or even 12-8.

Here they are:

#1: Trayce Jackson-Davis only took 21.1% of Indiana’s shots while on the floor.

Frankly, this is unconscionable. And I don’t think it’s some kind of Archie Miller blind spot. I’m sure he would agree and nod along emphatically while reading this.

But through some combination of better scheming, more consistent play from Trayce, better guard play, or Archie finding some other way to hold his team accountable for the objective being carried out come hell or high water, this number absolutely has to be higher.

(Quick note: the reason why I used %shots instead of %possessions is that turnovers count in possessions used, and Trayce had a very good turnover rate (12%). So his %possessions stat is already deflated because of that number, especially in comparison to other big men, most of whom turn the ball over more than Trayce.)

The key all season long for Indiana, as we all know, is how many shots Trayce puts up. And he’s needed to up a lot more.

Here is a rundown of Trayce’s shot attempts in Indiana’s wins:

• 12
• 17
• 15
• 12
• 12
• 7
• 3
• 11
• 12
• Average: 11.2

And now the rundown of Trayce’s shot attempts in Indiana’s losses:

• 8
• 9
• 7
• 3
• 9
• 6
• 9
• 10
• 6
• 8
• 6
• Average: 9.0

Pretty obvious trend.

Now you might ask: is a 2-shot difference per game really that impactful? The answer is an emphatic yes, especially on a team as offensively limited as Indiana’s.

Trayce was very efficient in Big Ten play, generating 1.13 points per possession used in conference games. Granted, that efficiency likely would have dropped as usage increased, but given the paucity of efficient alternatives for Indiana, overall production almost surely would have increased.

And given that Indiana lost six conference games by single digits (including two by a single point), Trayce getting a couple more shots in those games, even if force-fed, might have been the difference between another win or two.

Imagine how we’d feel right now if Indiana was already a 20- or 21-win team that finished at .500 or better in this gauntlet of a conference?

And this isn’t just a “Well, it’s harder for big men to get shots” thing.

Look at other high-efficiency big men in the conference and the percentage of their teams shots they got:

• Luka Garza: 35.4%
• Trevion Williams: 30.5%
• Nate Reuvers: 29.2%
• Micah Potter: 28.1%
• Daniel Oturu: 27.1%
• Kalen Wesson: 24.5%
• Kofi Cockburn: 22.7%
• Jon Teske: 22.7%
• Mike Watkins: 22.6%
• Jalen Smith: 22.5% (Umm … paging Mark Turgeon)
• Trayce Jackson-Davis: 21.1%
• Xavier Tillman: 20.4%

Tillman and Smith obviously stand out for being low, but there is a major difference between those two examples and Trayce: Smith played with Anthony Cowan (an All-Conference guard) and Tillman played with Cassius Winston (an All-American guard).

Trayce did not. He was the focal point of the offense, and Indiana’s most efficient option almost every time down the court.

So, moving forward, keep tracking Trayce’s shot attempts. If the Hoosiers are going to make any noise in the Big Ten or NCAA Tournaments, he is going to need to get between 12-15 shots per game.

And, his health willing, there is really no good excuse for it not happening.

Now onto the second stat, which is almost surely related to the first …

#2: In Big Ten play, Indiana finished 13th in turnover rate (18.1%) and 12th in assist rate (49.7%).

Quick refresher:

• Turnover rate is the percentage of a team’s possessions that result in a turnover.
• Assist rate is assists divided by field goal attempts, so it tracks the percentage of field goals that were assisted — typically a sign of good ball movement, guard play, and shot-making ability.

And yes, I’m combining two stats into one here, because it’s the combination that matters.

Michigan State actually finished last in the conference in turnover rate, but had such a high assist rate that they were able to overcome it. Indiana? Not so much.

We talked all season long about the struggles of Indiana’s guards, and no combination of statistics puts this on more obvious display than these two numbers.

Surprisingly, Rob Phinisee and Al Durham were the two biggest culprits in terms of turnovers, with rates of 23.1% and 21.7% respectively.

While Rob balanced this out with an assist rate of 26.9%, a big jump from last season (19.3%), Al’s was just 17.9% — though that did represent a major jump for him compared to the last two seasons (11.9% and 10.0%).

What about Devonte Green? He actually kept his turnovers in check, at just 17.5%, a drastic improvement over his previous three seasons at IU. But as many fans will quickly point out, some of Devonte’s poorest shot decisions might as well have been turnovers … a point on which I’d agree.

Mix in the high turnover rates and comparatively low assist rates of Justin Smith, Joey Brunk, Jerome Hunter, Armaan Franklin, and Race Thompson, and you have a team that wasted far too many possessions either giving the ball up or creating a suboptimal shot attempt.

One element of this, of course, is not getting the ball to Trayce enough. He had the lowest turnover rate on the team and was the most efficient scorer. More touches for him would have theoretically improved both of these numbers.

Another issue is a lack of shooting. While Devonte, Al, and Rob were all fairly reliable outside shooters, they did not comprise a high-volume trio. And no one else showed any kind of consistency.

Another issue is shot selection. None of Devonte, Rob, Justin, Joey, Armaan, or even Jerome have been able to justify the amount of shots they took with resulting efficiency. Granted, someone has to take the shots for Indiana, but there has been plenty of anecdotal evidence of all six of these guys picking the wrong time to take the wrong shot. (The overall offensive scheme and coaching decisions has to get some blame for this as well.)

But the biggest issue is simply an overall lack of decision-making and play-making ability from the guards. This was especially glaring during the final eight minutes of the Wisconsin game.

On balance, for whatever combination of reasons you want to cite, Indiana has gotten some of the least productive and most inconsistent collective guard play in the conference. It’s tough to rise above the Wednesday Big Ten Tournament game when that is the case.

[Editor’s note: One note on this section that may not be articulated clearly enough above: while Indiana has gotten objectively inconsistent production from its guards, that is not solely the guards’ “fault.” Coaching, scheme, spacing, inability of others’ to make shots, etc., is all mixed in there.]

On the bright side …

Rob Phinisee did end the regular season on a high note, with 12 assists and 2 turnovers over his final two games plus a slight uptick in scoring. He seems to be playing a bit better as we head down the stretch.

Al Durham has shown more consistent scoring production over the last five games. He’s also making a name for himself as a guy who wants to take big shots down the stretch, and he’s making his fair share.

And we know Devonte can go nuclear one half and silent the next. It’s just priced into the experience at this point.

Moving forward, if Devonte can string together some productive performances, and the overall improvement we’ve seen of late from Rob and Al is real, it will go a long way toward Indiana having a chance to win some games in the Big Ten and NCAA Tournament.

As long as they remember their #1 objective …

Get Trayce the damn ball! 😉

Image credit: “File:Trayce Jackson-Davis 2.jpg” by The Hoosier from Bloomington, IN, United States is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0 

Archie Miller still has a long way to go to fulfill the vision for Indiana basketball that Fred Glass laid out when he fired Tom Crean and hired the rising coaching star from Dayton.

• Archie’s Hoosiers have yet to finish above .500 in conference play.
• Archie’s Hoosiers have yet to make an NCAA Tournament.
• And when games go bad for Archie’s Hoosiers, they seem to go really bad. (I’ll spare you the litany of putrid performance we’ve seen over the last 2+ seasons.)

But for all of the things that Archie has not yet done at Indiana, and for all of the reasonable question marks that IU fans still have about Archie’s vision for the program and his ability execute on that vision, there is one thing Archie has proven during his time at Indiana, and going back to his tenure at Dayton, that Indiana fans can fully embrace and feel good about:

Archie Miller is a damn good coach in close games.

In fact, he’s one of the best in the country.

Breaking down Archie Miller’s impressive record in close games

With the Hoosiers’ win over Michigan State last night, Indiana is now 5-0 this season in games decided by five points or fewer (or that went to OT):

• def. UConn 57-54
• def. Nebraska 96-90 (OT)
• def. Notre Dame 62-60
• def. Northwestern 66-62
• def. Michigan State 67-63

This brings Archie’s record in close games at Indiana to 18-10. The Hoosiers were 8-7 in such games last season and 5-3 in such games during Archie’s first season at Indiana.

That 18-10 record equates to a winning percentage of 64.3%. Remember that number, as I’ll give it some context in a bit.

If we look back at Archie’s time at Dayton, his teams showed a similar ability to win close games. Here are the records:

• 2017: 6-3
• 2016: 11-3
• 2015: 10-3
• 2014: 7-4
• 2013: 3-7
• 2012: 5-5

Overall, that’s a record of 42-25 at Dayton — a winning percentage of 62.7%.

If you look at Archie’s year-by-year records in close games, two seasons immediately jump out as outliers: the 2012 and 2013 seasons, his first two seasons as a head coach. It stands to reason that a brand new head coach might have some on-the-job learning to do in close games, which could lead to some growing pains.

So if you remove those first two seasons and look at what Archie has done since, the record becomes even more impressive: 52-23, a winning percentage of 69.3%.

But what does that record and winning percentage actually mean?

Let’s put those numbers into some useful context

How good is a good coach supposed to be in close game situations, which often can be dictated by a single miss or make, or a single bounce of a basketball this way or that?

Thinking about this reminded me of a graphic that Jordan Sperber tweeted out in December of 2018. Obviously some of the data will have shifted by then, but this will still give you a good frame of reference for how to judge Archie’s record in close games.

(That image might be a little small, so click here to view an enlarged version.)

The X-axis is the number of close games a coach has been in, and the Y-axis is the winning percentage. The farther up and to the right, the better.

The red arrow indicates Archie’s placement on the graphic. At that time, he still had fewer than 75 opportunities in close games, but he was firmly above the 60% mark. He has now coached in 95 such games, so he would be more toward the middle, and his winning percentage has only gone up.

As you can see, there aren’t a ton of guys with a winning percentage above 60% in close games. Among the elite company Archie is in:

• Brad Stevens
• Kelvin Sampson (I mean, say what you will, but the dude can coach.)
• Mark Few
• Bill Self
• Jim Boeheim
• Steve Fisher
• Dana Altman

Astute eyes will also notice that other less-heralded coaching names from IU’s past like Dan Dakich and Rob Senderhoff are also at or above 60%. Clearly, just having an elite winning percentage in close games isn’t enough to make you an elite coach.

Furthermore, you’ll notice that Coach K, Roy Williams, Tom Izzo, Jay Wright, Bo Ryan, and many other elite, Hall of Fame-level coaches don’t crack 60% for this graphic. Yet, if this were a graphic showing the percentage of games in which a coach’s team dominated an opponent and didn’t even need to worry about a close game, those great coach would surely be among the best.

So please take this statistical analysis for the limited scope in which it’s intended.

So … what does Archie’s record in close games ultimately mean?

Well, Archie now has a fairly large sample size of 95 opportunities across 8+ seasons. So it’s difficult to say that his success in close games is just a noisy statistic due a small sample size.

It’s pretty clear that Archie is able to do a good job of getting his team to execute when all the chips are on the table late in a game.

And this bodes well for his future at IU.

Obviously for Indiana to return to being one of the nation’s elite (or even just great) programs, Archie will need to continue to upgrade the talent and ability of his teams, and then start producing more dominant wins and fewer pathetic, non-competitive losses.

Once Archie does that, or I suppose if Archie is able to do that, then winning close games won’t just be a matter of keeping NCAA Tournament hopes alive, as it’s felt the last three seasons. Instead, winning close games will be the difference in winning Big Ten titles, earning protected seeds, and making tournament runs.

It’s still just Year 3. We’re still getting to know our young coach. And the jury is still out about a lot.

But I think it’s safe for fans to believe that if Indiana can just reach the final few minutes of a game with a shot to win, Archie Millers has proven that he will, more often than not, put his team in a position to come away with a close, hard-fought win.

A few thoughts with a night to sleep on Indiana’s performance last night against Northwestern and Archie’s comments after …

The time for changes is now.

Frankly, it was probably a while ago. Maybe even a year or two ago.

But here we are, in the now, incapable of changing the past, and so the time for changes is unequivocally now.

Fortunately, Archie seems to recognize this if his postgame comments are to be trusted and if whispers of his apoplectic postgame address to the team are to be believed (no reason to doubt them).

Here is the reality

Indiana has somehow worked its way to a 12-3 record despite a month of mostly poor play that has seen our KenPom ranking drop from #20 after the FSU win all the way to #43 as I type this — despite going 4-3 over that span.

Indiana has continued to rack up wins because they’ve had the opportunity to beat teams that are NIT-level or worse, but they have lost or been bludgeoned by each of the NCAA Tournament-level teams they’ve faced.

Still, 12 wins in the bank is something to work with. One is a quality win over a top-15 team. Three others are against top-75 competition. Two more are Big Ten victories. That is significant regardless of which direction the advanced metrics are trending.

So despite all the issues, we’re still sitting in a pretty good spot. The glass is absolutely half full.

But …

The current state of the team just feels more precarious than the current record reality actually is because we all know what’s coming: an intense Big Ten gauntlet that will provide a succession of the types of teams we have yet to prove we can beat consistently or even compete with away from home.

Our anxiety and consternation as fans comes more from projecting forward than simply assessing what’s happened.

Here is what needs to happen

Last year, and maybe even dating back to the year before that, Archie let problems fester until it was too late. He’s admitted this. Which is why he needs to make changes now.

And the change is this:

Let’s roll with the guys who are bought in. And let’s give that group the opportunity become the best they can be.

Now to be clear: I’m not saying we immediately give up on anyone.

All 11 guys on the roster have an important role to play on this team if they want to be a part of it. And I think all 11 guys should be given at least one more chance to show how much being an Indiana basketball player and member of this team means to them.

Which is why I think it’s ultimatum time.

It’s easy to surmise that this might have been the crux, either explicitly or implicitly, of Archie’s address to the team last night. If so, I applaud it.

Make this moment the dividing line: you’re either with us 100% and bought into what we’re trying to do, flawed as it might be, or we’re moving forward without you.

It’s not a mean or vindictive ultimatum; it’s a realistic and even compassionate one. What if some guys are actually looking for an out but can’t find a reasonable off-ramp? Give them one if they want it. Be firm, but offer grace.

“This program and this way of doing things isn’t for everyone. Maybe it’s just not for you. And that’s okay. It may just be time to forward separately.”

Most guys will take that challenge and come back fighting, ready to show that they are bought in and have what it takes. The gravity of the situation will move them. The accountability being demanded will subconsciously inspire them.

Others, perhaps not so much.

Others might say they’re ready or pretend they’re ready or even convince themselves that they’re ready, but they may show you later they aren’t. At that point, the choice is no longer theirs; it’s the coach’s. It’s yours Archie. And you better hold firm to that line. The chance was offered. A choice was presented. But it’s not indefinite.

It’s now or never.

Get on, or get off.

The bottom line

I think all IU fans would rather go down swinging and miss the tournament with guys who are at least bought in and playing together than hang onto some vague notion of the idealized version of this team ever materializing … because that doesn’t even seem possible at this point.

Now, this philosophy may not be the best way to win games in the short term, but it’s absolutely the best way to build a strong culture in the long-term. The latter is more meaningful than the former if Archie Miller’s program is ever going to be successful.

And by the way — I’m not saying it’s fait accompli that we would miss the tourney if we allowed some guys to remove themselves from the rotation or even the team. It very likely would make us better and more consistent over time, just with a lower ceiling.

But to hell with the ceiling once it starts to close in on you. Blast it open.

So I’m not here advocating for Archie to give up on anyone. I’m certainly not doing that. But I am suggesting it’s time to draw a line in the sand and offer everyone one final choice for which side they want to be on.

This season and team are still filled with potential. But right now, any reasonable assessment of the team’s overall play suggests that Indiana is closer to another season spiraling out of control than actually realizing that potential.

It’s time for the coach to do what it takes to yank this team (and program) back from the brink.

It’s now or never.

Let’s go Arch.

The future of your IU tenure depends on it.

Photo by Vladislav Babienko on Unsplash