Exiting the nonconference.
Three weeks into December, Indiana men’s basketball tournament resume consists of zero quality wins and three losses. With a schedule that features Chattanooga and Winthrop to close out 2024, Indiana will finish the calendar year without any quality wins and hopefully just those three losses.
Then comes Big Ten play. As things stand, Indiana will have plenty of opportunities for 1uad 1 and 2 wins that would improve its resume and get it firmly back into the tournament field, but it’s not really clear how this team would do that.
Like I said after the last game, this team is more than one fix away from winning against good or even above average teams on a regular basis. It’s something Mike Woodson has struggled to do since year one at Indiana and could cost him a consecutive postseason if he doesn’t fix something fast.
So where does Woodson and his staff start? Hopefully by establishing an identity and going from there.
11 games into this season, Indiana has used 11 different combinations of players for at least 10 minutes this year. Outside of the recent starting lineup of Trey Galloway, Myles Rice, Oumar Ballo, Malik Reneau, and Mackenzie Mgbako, none of these lineups have been used more than 7.2% of the time, per KenPom.
Had this been working, it would be a testament to the flexibility and depth that all the pieces this roster provided the team. It’s not working though, and the lack of go-to guys and lineups will not help Indiana win close games.
As the no. 50 overall team in KenPom, Mike Woodson has some decisions to make. The offensive (47th) and defensive (69th) ratings are close enough that either could become a point of emphasis from here on out.
Making this decision starts with acknowledging that the best offensive units and best defensive units are not the same with this group. And that the starting lineup isn’t particularly great at either.
According to CBB, IU’s starters, the group who plays the most minutes together by far, has the third worst offensive rating of any of the top 10 most played lineups, while only being the sixth best defensive unit among the same 10 lineups. All ten of these lineups have appeared in at least three games together.
In order to develop an identity as either an offensive or defensive team – and Indiana’s roster has the talent and athleticism to be either – Woodson is going to need to get away from playing those five together so often.
Here are some alternatives, according to CBBAnalytic’s offensive and defensive ratings:
Top Five Defensive Units
- Leal, Galloway, Goode, Tucker, Ballo
- Rice, Tucker, Mgbako, Reneau, Ballo
- Carlyle, Galloway, Mgbako, Reneau, Ballo
- Rice, Galloway, Goode, Mgbako, Ballo
- Rice, Galloway, Goode, Tucker, Ballo
Top Five Offensive Units
- Galloway, Goode, Tucker, Mgbako, Ballo
- Leal, Galloway, Goode, Tucker, Ballo
- Rice, Galloway, Goode, Reneau, Ballo
- Rice, Tucker, Mgbako, Reneau, Ballo
- Rice, Galloway, Mgbako, Reneau, Ballo
Notes
Oumar Ballo is clearly one of if not the most, important players on this team, appearing on all ten lists here. Trey Galloway and Myles Rice in the tier just below him, also frequently featured in Indiana’s best lineups.
It’s also not hurting Indiana as much as some fans may think to play Malik Reneau and Oumar Ballo together. More important, according to the lists above, is the combinations of players around them and which side of the ball Indiana wants to emphasize.
The only lineup that appears on both lists, maybe surprisingly, is Leal, Galloway, Goode, Tucker, and Ballo. They’ve only played 15 minutes together across four games, but should see more time as an intriguing mix of rebounding, passing, driving, and shooting ability.
The lack of overlap between good offensive and defensive lineups is why I think, however rudimentary it may seem, Indiana needs to decide whether it will be an offensively or defensively oriented unit this year.
It doesn’t feel likely that some unused lineup emerges that makes them good at both.
It’s good to see Bryson Tucker making such a positive impact on Indiana so far this year, but also disappointing how little Kanaan Carlyle appears to affect the team positively. Given his talent and athleticism, I’m inclined to believe it’s a scheme/fit issue, one I’d hope to see this staff rectify before season’s end.
At the end of the day, even some of these lineups are a bit underwhelming, hardly breaking the 60th percentile among Division I teams. Identifying what has worked is a start, but Woodson and company need to start finding lineups that perform like elite teams.
All that just to maybe fix Indiana men’s basketball this season. The future beyond that is even more unknown.