3 Frustrating Contradictions Weighing Down This Year's IU Basketball Team

While nothing can be done about IU's flawed roster until the offseason, there are some easily identifiable tweaks that could help put this IU team in a better position to win games down the stretch.

Photo courtesy of Indiana University Athletics

There are myriad reasons why this Indiana basketball season has been so frustrating for fans.

Some of the reasons are roster-based, meaning there are no fixes during the season. We can lament these issues, but it’s mostly wasted breath or keystrokes until we get to the offseason when the roster can be addressed.

For example, we all know (now) that Indiana is bereft of consistent backcourt productivity. But these are the guards we’ve got, and we can’t change it until the final buzzer sounds on the season.

All that matters right now is figuring out how to put these players in the best positions to succeed over the next 14+ games. It’s not an easy strategic problem to solve. Severe limitations in the backcourt mean you have severe limitations as a team.

But it’s the coach’s job to take the talent he has assembled and put it in the best position to maximize its collective strengths while minimizing weaknesses. Obviously this hasn’t happened.

Consider that Indiana opened the season ranked #50 in KenPom. This was much lower than anyone wanted to be after finishing last season at #30. But the questions surrounding the backcourt, and the massive amount of production departing with TJD, made it a reasonable place for this group to start.

If Indiana was still hovering around #50, perhaps even with the same 12-6 record the Hoosiers have now, it would be a little easier to say, “Well, Woody misjudged some things personnel-wise, but at least he’s maximizing what he’s got.”

That’s how many of us ended up feeling last season. The 2022-23 Hoosiers employed a strategic approach built around TJD and Jalen Hood-Schifino that may have had some blind spots but ultimately allowed Indiana’s two most talented players to spread their wings and lead the way to a 4-seed. It was a good season.

However, as I’m sure you know, Indiana has steadily dropped all the way to its current depth of #94 in KenPom (as I type this on January 17th). This certainly matches the eye test. It is also the most objective evidence we have that in addition to the roster having massive flaws, the strategic approach to maximizing the roster has significant flaws as well.

And these strategic issues, even more than the errors in roster construction, are what really have IU fans frustrated from game to game.

Because some of the stuff is … obvious. Or at least it seems that way.

At a minimum, it seems tweakable, for a team that clearly needs to tweak what it’s doing to start achieving different results. (You might say our entire basketball philosophy needs a complete overhaul, and you might be right. But that’s not happening mid-season so, again, that conversation is better left for the offseason.)

Here are a few things I’m having a hard time wrapping my head around as the 2023-24 season teeters firmly on the brink.

1. Indiana is a poor shooting team that insists on taking the toughest shot in the game.

If we're searching for a way to improve Indiana’s 122nd-ranked offensive attack, the first place to look is our continued willingness to play into opposing defenses’ hands by taking long 2s — defined as shots take from 17' to the 3-point line.

So far this season, we’ve taken 83 long 2s, which equates to about 4.6 long 2s per game. That’s in the 98th percentile nationally.

Is that bad? Well, my simple answer would be yes. It’s generally the most inefficient shot in the game, which is why so many of the most successful offenses in college and the NBA have minimized its usage.

But context is everything.

Consider St. John’s, which has one of the best coaches of all time in Rick Pitino, a man who was ahead of the curve in valuing the 3-point shot. This year’s Johnnies have actually taken 106 long 2s in 17 games. That’s a lot!

But here’s the thing: St. John’s has actually made 52 of their 106 long 2s. That means they are scoring 0.991 points per possession (ppp) on long 2s — which is the 14th-best in the country. Fine. Okay. It may violate my modern basketball sensibilities, but it’s a shot that apparently makes some sense for their roster this season.

How efficient has Indiana been on long 2s this season? It’s not pretty.

We're shooting just 26.5% on long 2s, which equates to 0.53 ppp. Even worse, the 0.53 ppp mark is ranked 305th in the country.

In other words: we're taking more long 2s than almost every team in the country while being less effective at making them than almost every team in the country.

That just doesn’t make sense. It’s mid-January. It’s not working.

Look at Indiana State, which is excellent offensively (20th in adjusted offensive efficiency via KenPom). The Sycamores are actually less efficient than Indiana on long 2s, scoring just 0.5 ppp when they take them. But they've only taken 12 long 2s all season, so it doesn’t have much impact on their overall efficiency.

Again, while I’m generally anti-long 2s, I’m a firm believer that context is everything and coaches need to adapt to the differences in their roster each season.

Last season, we were in the 97th percentile in the amount of long 2s taken. But at least we shot 40.6% on our 175 long 2 attempts. That equates to 0.81 ppp, which would rank in the top 100 this season.

Jalen Hood-Schifino actually shot 42.3% on his 104 long 2 attempts, which is why I backed off my criticism of him taking so many as the season went along. It made sense given the roster and what Mike Woodson had to do to get the most out of his talented freshman after Jalen was thrust into the role of full-time lead guard when X went down. You had to allow Jalen to play in his comfort zone, even if some inefficiency came along with it. Because guess what: so did the Purdue game at Mackey.

For this year’s Hoosiers, there is one guy I’d let take a long 2 if it’s a clean, in-rhythm look: Mackenzie Mgbako.

So far this season, Mackenzie has taken 20 of them, making eight. That’s 40% and 0.8 ppp. Again, that’s not great, and I’d prefer he focus on other shots. But given his demonstrated shooting skill, and how much we need Mackenzie being aggressive offensively, there are benefits to him not overthinking what shots to take.

However, guys like CJ Gunn (5-21) and Gabe Cupps (4-19) have no business hoisting up any long 2s, let alone more than one per game each. And what’s wild is we even run baseline out of bounds plays specifically to get CJ that shot. Why? Given our lack of offensive rebounding, every long 2 we take is essentially a half-turnover.

It’s just bad, inefficient basketball. Literally every other shot type Indiana attempts is more efficient than the long 2s.

This is one simple, strategic tweak that could add some efficiency around the margins for an offense that so desperately needs it.

2. Indiana is elite at getting fouled, but among the nation’s worst at making free throws

Statistically speaking, Indiana’s greatest strength relative to the rest of the country is its ability to get to the free throw line.

The Hoosiers take roughly 4.09 free throws for every 10 field goal attempts — which equates to a free throw rate of 40.9%. That is 23rd in the country. It’s the only statistic for which Indiana finds itself in the top 25.

Well that’s something to build on and capitalize on, right? Theoretically yes, but in practice it hasn’t worked out so well.

The reason is Indiana’s awful free throw shooting. The Hoosiers are shooting just 65.7% from the line, which is 324th nationally.

Okay, but let me play devil’s advocate for a moment: if a team is getting a fouled a lot, it’s probably playing through the post, which means big guys getting fouled, and big guys often struggle from the line. So maybe this is just a normal trend you see with high FTRate teams. Seems reasonable, right?

Here is a list of the other major conference schools that are in the top-30 in FTRate — so these are all elite teams at playing through the post and getting to the line — and their free throw percentage (national rank in parentheses).

• Nevada: 73.3% (103rd)

• Arkansas: 71.6% (170th)

• Maryland: 70.1% (237th)

• Georgia: 71.4% (177th)

• Louisville: 74.6% (67th)

• Purdue: 72.7% (131st)

• North Carolina: 76.0% (41st)

For goodness sakes, Louisville is a good free throw shooting team! What excuse do we have?

In total, there are 19 major and mid-major schools in the top-30 in FT Rate. All of them but one (#224 UTEP) shoot at least 70% from the line. UTEP shoots 67.7%, which is still higher than Indiana.

The point is: all of the other high-FTRate teams are able to capitalize on their ability to get to the line. Indiana, on the other hand, seems to be actually getting worse the more they head to the line this season. Since making 12-16 (75%) against Ohio State, Indiana has gone 4-15, 16-27, and 4-9 from the charity stripe in three critical Big Ten games.

Good teams usually have multiple strengths that complement one another. Mediocre teams seem to spend entire seasons trying to win games with one hand tied behind their back, which is what it often feels like when the Hoosiers’ greatest strength directly leads to its greatest weakness.

Combine the inefficiency of Indiana’s high-volume long 2s attack with the Hoosiers’ inability to capitalize from the line, and you get the lowest adjusted efficiency ranking for an IU offense since 2014 — a season we all recall with such fondness.

Okay, but with all that said, surely we can rely on our extreme height and athleticism to help us add possessions through rebounds, steals, and blocks, right?

Well …