York Automotive Delivers Transformational, Program-Changing Commitment to Crossroad of Champions Supporting Indiana State Men’s Basketball

WANTED: Passionate Sycamore Fanatics. That You?

Register NOW to join our community of die-hard Sycamore fans.

Register Log in
GoSycamores

GoSycamores

The Renn Level
image_handler.aspx


TERRE HAUTE, Ind. — Indiana State Athletics has announced a program-changing commitment from York Automotive to Crossroad of Champions, providing a transformational investment in Indiana State University Men's Basketball and the continued growth of the Terre Haute community.

More...
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
I do love this quote...

"Investing in Men's Basketball is an investment in our community," Rob York said. "Indiana State Basketball has the ability to bring people together, create shared pride, and elevate Terre Haute. To remain competitive, we must be willing to invest at a championship level and challenge ourselves, and others, to think bigger about what this program can become. This commitment is about supporting something bigger than ourselves."
 
I'm left to wonder.....Is this an NIL financial commitment?? Will we see ramped up recruiting efforts??
 
Last edited:
Question.....do you take this "program elevating" donation and change coaches.....or do you use it and try to find higher caliber players? Sadly, I dont know if Graves is our man for the job. I hate saying that because I really like the man, such a wonderful human being.....but results are results. He hasn't been close to having a winning season in his HC career. Also, you have to wonder if this is wearing on him, too. He picked up a T today and that just isn't like him. Sad we have to talk about this just 1.5 seasons after our recent success, but it is what it is.
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
BlueBleeder said:
Sad we have to talk about this just 1.5 seasons after our recent success, but it is what it is.
Click to expand...
1.5 seasons is quick but he also had 5 seasons at South Alabama attached to him. I think people could look past the South Alabama gig for many reason if he were to show some signs of improvement here. But when you look at the product in year 2, see where the program is going (doesn't look good) and then look back and see 5 not good seasons at SA you are going to get judged way quicker. Facts are Graves needs a winning season, then Graves needs a 20 win season for people to start believing in him. Hate to say it because he is an outstanding human and I would like nothing more for him to consistently be upper half of the conference every season and retire as a Sycamore. But that just isn't going to happen with the way things are going
 
BlueBleeder said:
Question.....do you take this "program elevating" donation and change coaches.....or do you use it and try to find higher caliber players? Sadly, I dont know if Graves is our man for the job. I hate saying that because I really like the man, such a wonderful human being.....but results are results. He hasn't been close to having a winning season in his HC career. Also, you have to wonder if this is wearing on him, too. He picked up a T today and that just isn't like him. Sad we have to talk about this just 1.5 seasons after our recent success, but it is what it is.
Click to expand...
Your right. Just like Mallory. Great guy, but can’t get the job done.
 
BlueBleeder said:
Question.....do you take this "program elevating" donation and change coaches.....or do you use it and try to find higher caliber players? Sadly, I dont know if Graves is our man for the job. I hate saying that because I really like the man, such a wonderful human being.....but results are results. He hasn't been close to having a winning season in his HC career. Also, you have to wonder if this is wearing on him, too. He picked up a T today and that just isn't like him. Sad we have to talk about this just 1.5 seasons after our recent success, but it is what it is.
Click to expand...

Players. Our roster is just not good.

We've seen that we can compete at a high level in flashes. We all know the system works but it is predicated on having multiple capable shooters on the floor. To spend finite resources to make someone go away when you would still have the same roster deficiencies would be an inefficient use of resources to gross financial malpractice.

Now, there is a discussion that can be had whether or not the current staff as constructed are good talent evaluators and/or recruiters but that is for another day.
 
A few of my thoughts.
1. We were "lucky" with Teal and Scott. Or you can call it good talent evaluation.
2. Wagner was on the bench at Rice and probably not highly recruited.
3. We have had 0 luck on our bigs as far as injuries and development.
4. We can only get moderately talented foreign players and they have to adjust.
5. Hall has had to make major adjustments to be a primary D1 ball handler, especially at his size.
6. Money is a factor.
7. Talented height has always been a problem to bring in.
8. I'm sure we are trying to get IN players, but all players travel now and go for money.
9. Major decisions ahead about using money, who do we keep, who do we get?
10. I like our recruits, but how long will they be here?
 
sycamorebacker said:
A few of my thoughts.
1. We were "lucky" with Teal and Scott. Or you can call it good talent evaluation.
2. Wagner was on the bench at Rice and probably not highly recruited.
3. We have had 0 luck on our bigs as far as injuries and development.
4. We can only get moderately talented foreign players and they have to adjust.
5. Hall has had to make major adjustments to be a primary D1 ball handler, especially at his size.
6. Money is a factor.
7. Talented height has always been a problem to bring in.
8. I'm sure we are trying to get IN players, but all players travel now and go for money.
9. Major decisions ahead about using money, who do we keep, who do we get?
10. I like our recruits, but how long will they be here?
Click to expand...

Everything boils down to talent evaluation and closing. Right now, we have a below average MVC roster from top to bottom. What's the overall hit rate of above average to All-MVC level players over the last two years? Here are the last two years of additions:

2024-2025
0 Tyran Cook
1 Josiah LeGree
2 Samage Teel
4 Jahni Summers
5 Jayan Walker
8 Camp Wagner
10 K'mani Doughty
14 Bruno Alocen
15 Markus Harding
24 Merritt Alderink

2025-2026
0 Sterling Young
5 Zyair Greene
6 Jo Van Buggenhout
7 Hunter Harding
9 Sivert Wærstad Nordheim
10 Enel St. Bernard
21 Martin Kaupanger
23 Ian Scott
30 Xavier Hall

I think I could make the argument that out of those two classes, the hit rate is 4 (maaaaaaybe 5) out of 19 -- or a whopping 21-26%. If you want to expand that to be serviceable to average MVC player, it goes up to maybe 50%. That's a LOT of misses. That's a problem and that's why you're losing. We can come up with a long list of excuses but at the end of the day, you either get the job done or you don't.

If I'm Graves, I'm re-evaluating everyone and everything. I know one thing I'd for sure do is reach out to Evan Miyakawa over in Indianapolis and hire him to do some consulting work and try to develop an analytical recruiting model that fits the systems core tenets. I'd hunt information asymmetry to try to equalize any perceived (or real) disadvantages we've got.
 

Become a Supporting Member to remove this ad and help support the site.
Jason Svoboda said:
Players. Our roster is just not good.

We've seen that we can compete at a high level in flashes. We all know the system works but it is predicated on having multiple capable shooters on the floor. To spend finite resources to make someone go away when you would still have the same roster deficiencies would be an inefficient use of resources to gross financial malpractice.

Now, there is a discussion that can be had whether or not the current staff as constructed are good talent evaluators and/or recruiters but that is for another day.
Click to expand...
I have lots of faith in coach's abilities X and O wise. My question was more based on the inability to get the right players. Does money fix that, or is it poor talent evaluation? I really want this staff to be successful and feel crappy talking about this, but I am trying to remove the emotional side of it and look at it analytically.
 
Jason Svoboda said:
Everything boils down to talent evaluation and closing. Right now, we have a below average MVC roster from top to bottom. What's the overall hit rate of above average to All-MVC level players over the last two years? Here are the last two years of additions:

2024-2025
0 Tyran Cook
1 Josiah LeGree
2 Samage Teel
4 Jahni Summers
5 Jayan Walker
8 Camp Wagner
10 K'mani Doughty
14 Bruno Alocen
15 Markus Harding
24 Merritt Alderink
Click to expand...
Now that 25 is past, we can talk in retrospect. I'm no expert and had little visual exposure, but, at the time I was bewildered by the failures of Summers and Alderink. And I watched Cook and Teel on YouTube some and I didn't really see that much difference.

I still say that the compressed recruiting time in the portal makes a complete evaluation tough. And when you are deciding between two or more players and the time is short you might just have to take the first to commit. Isn't that like flipping a coin?
 
Jason Svoboda said:
Everything boils down to talent evaluation and closing. Right now, we have a below average MVC roster from top to bottom. What's the overall hit rate of above average to All-MVC level players over the last two years? Here are the last two years of additions:

2024-2025
0 Tyran Cook
1 Josiah LeGree
2 Samage Teel
4 Jahni Summers
5 Jayan Walker
8 Camp Wagner
10 K'mani Doughty
14 Bruno Alocen
15 Markus Harding
24 Merritt Alderink

2025-2026
0 Sterling Young
5 Zyair Greene
6 Jo Van Buggenhout
7 Hunter Harding
9 Sivert Wærstad Nordheim
10 Enel St. Bernard
21 Martin Kaupanger
23 Ian Scott
30 Xavier Hall

I think I could make the argument that out of those two classes, the hit rate is 4 (maaaaaaybe 5) out of 19 -- or a whopping 21-26%. If you want to expand that to be serviceable to average MVC player, it goes up to maybe 50%. That's a LOT of misses. That's a problem and that's why you're losing. We can come up with a long list of excuses but at the end of the day, you either get the job done or you don't.

If I'm Graves, I'm re-evaluating everyone and everything. I know one thing I'd for sure do is reach out to Evan Miyakawa over in Indianapolis and hire him to do some consulting work and try to develop an analytical recruiting model that fits the systems core tenets. I'd hunt information asymmetry to try to equalize any perceived (or real) disadvantages we've got.
Click to expand...
I checked out Evan’s site as this is the first I’d heard about him, really insightful
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top