Took me two seconds to find that Izzo did both because MSU couldn’t guard him 1 on 1. https://www.mlive.com/spartans/2023...ues-zach-edey-drops-38-on-michigan-state.html
Which, to his credit, no one could because he is a beast.
Conference predictions out.
- Thread starter dbmhoosier
- Start date
Which, to his credit, no one could because he is a beast.
I looked at pu's roster and expected lineup at one point and saw two experienced, but manageable guards, and a front court without elite talent or scary athleticism. We've seen Loyer and Smith struggle against quickness or length. They won't have Edey to bail them out with free throws and pushing his man all the way to the bucket.
Purdue lost its once in a generation giant. This is just like when Tiller left - - Purdue football was just going dominate forever regardless of the coach, right?
Seen this before.
Purdue had its shot w Edey. Damn near took it home. Alas...
Cracks me up that PU folks for 2-3 years would rail about the "just big" tag on Edey and now his retort is "we still have 7'2" and 7'4" guys". True, but they aren't Zack Edey!
So they didn’t try to guard him one on one and both Edey and Izzo are lying? Sounds to me Izzo is saying playing straight up and doubling didn’t work and Edey is saying he was shocked when the double didn’t come. Straight from the article.
“We have people that want to double him and give up 3′s, and then we have people that want to not give up 3′s. We tried both of and neither one of them worked today. Give them credit.”
Edey, for his part, said he was surprised not to face more double teams against the Spartans.
“I was surprised it didn’t come earlier, honestly,” Edey said. “I was kind of expecting it every time I caught the ball. Usually when someone has success, they change stuff up. But Izzo, he’s very steadfast in his ways. He wants to play 1-on-1, he wants to kind of make you beat him with twos.”
Yet Painter will figure it out as always and Purdue will compete for the big ten title.
How do you know, they both are rated a lot higher than Zach was! Zach did not walk in and set the world on fire! Painter develops players, Woody buys his players! Who is going to play center next year for IU? Purdue stands to lose 1 player, IU 6 to 8 at minimum are gone. Purdue has 5 players who can play center, all should be back next year, IU is gone go shopping!
TJD stayed 2 years under Woody, for a reason...and is now poised to become a starter in the NBA.
JHS wasn't really on NBA GM radar, at least as a guy that would be considered a lottery pick, when he left HS.
Ware was a bench guy at Oregon, and now he's probably an actual favorite for ROY in the NBA, along with Shepherd.
Malik has expanded and improved his game every year he's been in Bloomington.
Mackenzie very obviously improved and expanded his game throughout the year last year.
Woodson's problems aren't recruiting or player development. Its, for some reason, not being able to coach consistency. Which, in my opinion is the single most important thing a successful coach should be able to do.
Last edited:
I really don’t like what NCAA Football has regressed to. Way too many 40 point blowouts against cupcakes because of how the rating incentives are structured. Bball is structured better with cap of point margin.
I don't care enough to do research on this. So who the heck knows if I'm right or not? But it sounds good...
You/anyone, have to admit that Edey is a once in a generation type player. To come from relative obscurity, being his size, and to develop how he did, and THEN stay in school after he did...unprecedented. I know Painter is a "developer", but Edey is a unicorn. I honestly don't think basing much of anything on the last 2 years, when trying to predict Purdue basketball going forward, is a very good idea. Literally everything they did, everything they accomplished, the preseason success, the Final Four run, all of it, was Edey. I get as a Purdue fan, you want it to be about the program, the system, Painter being some Bob Knight level of coach...but that isn't factual.
Take the 2 Edey years away. His program is solid. They compete. But to just assume they'll be at the top of the conference, without high end talent...well, good luck with that. History would show that isn't likely to be the case. Pretty much every B10 championship team he's had, before Edey...had a highly rated kid or two on the roster. Ivey, Williams...Baby Boilers teams...those teams all had top 30-40 level players somewhere on their roster. I guess maybe Jacobsen pushes that a little bit...but quite obviously, unless he hits soon, or unless they sign someone of that caliber soon, the next two teams are going to be testing this theory.
Painter has a decent amount of clunker seasons, and obviously some epically horrible endings to seasons, when he doesn't have higher end talent.
Purdue without Edey...actually, has been a pretty similar type program to IU since Keady and RMK left, in terms of accomplishments. The main difference is Purdue has had A LOT more continuity, less extreme shifts. Painter is good, he deserves some credit for Edey, but on the flip side, Edey deserves A LOT of credit for boosting Purdue and Painters image. Painter ain't that good. 20 years prior to Edey is who Painter actually is.
I’m not basing it on the past two years though and I’m not saying every low ranked kid is going to be as good as Edey.
Let’s look at ratings though.
Trevion - highest was rivals at 128 ranked
Ivey - highest was rivals at 79.
Carsen Edwards - highest was ESPN at 89
Incoming class:
Harris - highest is 79
Jacobson - highest 57
Burgess - highest 116
Benter - NR
Cox - NR
And it sounds like all 5 of these guys have a very good chance at minutes this year or look the part of being a high level player. None seem to be reaches.
So who are the highly rated kids on the roster good rosters? Or where are you getting these “top 30-40 players” from? I guess it’s a good thing recruiting rankings are what they are, an average at best metric once you get outside of the top 20ish kids.
That was the group I didnt know or look up. Assumed Ivey was rated higher. So you had 1 group, in Painters 20 plus years of coaching, that he competed at the top of the conference with kids outside the top 40 on his roster.
Again...we'll see. Good luck though. I think its more likely than not he'll either change, or they'll go back to who they were before Edey. Good every now and then, but rarely ever a national threat. Actually worse than that since ALL their peers will be operating under a different set of rules now.
Realistically...he'll change. And it won't be some obvious line in the sand type change. It'll be a player or two here or there. Next year's team will have 2 portal guys...it'll be spun that they "had to do it", they've never been against the portal as long as the kids are a "fit"...and then they'll land a top 50 kid or two over the IUs and MSUs of the world. That isn't going to happen unless he changes his approach.
He will, or Purdue will become Northwestern.
Basically, Purdue and Painter has had more success with these un ranked players than IU with the 5 stars, Romeo, Ware, JHS,
TJD and who can forget Lander. IU has a lot of stars, but Purdue has had the WINS. That is what it is about! Purdue is young, coach is still young. One or two of the above players will be a stars!
Don't teams like Northwestern, Nebraska and Penn State kinda of like give IU fits the last 5 years! You need to get off your Soap Opera about Purdue and worry about whose roster your going to pillage next year!
Take Edey years out, and they really haven't had a lot more accomplishment level success. More stability, obviously.
I think you guys are going to "feel good" about getting back to not being relevant nationally. That fits your history anyways. And it'll make those "IU sucks" chants in Mackey a little louder. Real red headed step child emotions and all. The last few years have to have been confusing for you Purdue fans. Kinda like Billy Ray Valentine waking up in Louis Winthorpes bed... Maybe it'll work out for you guys like it did for him??? But it has to kinda feel that way for you right now.
Why does he need to portal though? You are operating under the assumption that every player is going to be average because they aren’t highly ranked while assuming none of them can take the step to be a really good big ten player. Why can’t a guy like Colvin, Heide, Harris, Cox grow into a round round type guard? Why can’t guys like Jacobson, Burgess and Benter grow into Fringe NBA players? Trevion and Mathias did?
You are stuck on recruiting rankings. An imperfect science.
Lots of teams have given IU fits the last 5 years. What's your point?
I honestly hope Painter sticks with his approach. There isn't a ton of other IU bball related discussion going on here right now, so its fun to pick apart what you guys think is a viable approach to stay relevant nationally.
Picture a big car race. Outside the car race is a big garage with varying levels of cars. Right now Purdue is openly choosing to pick lesser cars. I think its because they can't afford the nicer cars, so they're trying to control the narrative, and own it. Thinking their pit crew, their driver, will win them races over the faster cars. And maybe that'll happen for a bit, but cars ALWAYS end up winning races. Pick the top 7-8 race "teams", and then its ALWAYS "who has the fastest car", that wins. Purdue under Keady/Painter has "programmed" their way in to being solid. For 40 years they've done it. But they've ALWAYS been beaten by a faster car. And they always will, if they truly stick with what it sounds like their current plan is going to be.
IU is currently in a low period. But at some point, we'll find the right guy to matchup with the fast cars, and we'll be a power again nationally. I'd rather have a chance, with fast cars, than fool myself in to thinking I have a chance with moderate levels of competitiveness.
That brings the NIL game in to play. Any/all of the guys you listed will need to become REALLY good for Purdue to stay competitive nationally, actually most of them will need to. Painter has open disdain for players asking for more money, different roles, etc... There is ZERO chance he'll be able to avoid these conflicts going forward. Its such a rapidly changing game.
Hell, look at what's happening across college football right now. What happens if Colvin blows up this year the first 5-6 games...and starts getting other schools in his ear..."how much they paying you?"..."why are you not getting more shots"... And then Colvin starts askng questions and thinking about sitting out and redshirting if Purdue won't improve his NIL package immediately...
You guys think Purdue will be immune to all this. Its actually kind of sad.
But again...good luck.
Exact actual rankings are in imperfect science....teams that make Final Fours and win nattys have top 40-50 kids. That is a fact. There's a MUCH higher probability of kids ranked that high, being good, and leading teams to high levels of success. Obviously there are TONS of kids every year that make the ranking system look bad. But the data shows, EVERY natty winner, and an overwhelming majority of Final Four teams, have top 40-50 kids on their roster. Purdue might actually be THE anomaly, that hasn't either had top 50 HS kids, OR had a bevy of highly rated portal kids. And again...Edey is the reason for that anomaly, not Painter being some sort of savant developer.
I mean, Colvin can think about redshirting after playing 5 games, but he can’t. So….
I don’t think Purdue is immune to anything, but they pay their guys. You act like smith is making 100k and can go get a mil if he wants.
Yet Carsen almost took them there. Their issue in the past hasn’t been rankings. It has been length and athleticism. But they have more of that now. I guess if you want to say rankings are why, go for it.
He doesn't, if you can keep all your guys, most of them work out and human nature doesn't take over. I think there are a couple problems with what he's done. #1, he's painted NIL into something that's bad and he doesn't like. If he needs it, it's going to be really hard to get boosters to now change and step up. #2, he's not taking advantage of a tool that pretty much all of his opponents are now using. I think Matt is a great coach and he's been pretty flexible in adjusting to his roster, but I don't think Purdue is that unique compared to the rest of the college bball landscape. Guys like Braden, Loyer and whoever else has a good year (someone out of Colvin, Heide, your freshman big and I think Harris and Cox) are going to take a big step forward. If so, they will know they can get 7 figure NIL deals elsewhere and PU is going to be limited there, because the program's leader has said it's bad and he doesn't like it. If Braden has even a decent year, PU's going to have to pay him probably close to 2 million to keep him and if they do, that will likely frustrate some of the others. Maybe Matt can make it work, but I predict you're going to have a big turnover this year with 4-5 departures, outside of any graduations.
Whatever the game cut off is. No one thought you could do it in football either, but its now becoming "a thing".
You'll see. We won't even be discussing this a year from now.
In the NIL era, it's difficult to predict how (or if) a team will jell with all the departures/new players. Moreover, with four new teams in the conference, it further imbalances the schedules.
Anyhow, on paper, I think IU has the strongest roster in the B18--maybe Top 10 in the nation. That said, PU has more program cohesion and a solid coach. Will the Boilers miss Edey? Of course. But it wouldn't surprise me if they finished at or near the top of the B18.
MW has no excuses now. If IU finishes outside the Top 3 in the conference and/or fails to make the second weekend of the NCAAT (at least), it should be considered a program L.
Anyhow, on paper, I think IU has the strongest roster in the B18--maybe Top 10 in the nation. That said, PU has more program cohesion and a solid coach. Will the Boilers miss Edey? Of course. But it wouldn't surprise me if they finished at or near the top of the B18.
MW has no excuses now. If IU finishes outside the Top 3 in the conference and/or fails to make the second weekend of the NCAAT (at least), it should be considered a program L.
Its obvious to anyone outside their program. I'm surprised Painter has taken such a hard stance on it, he would see and feel these things much more than we all do. I happen to know though, for a fact, that he's pushing hard behind the scenes for more of an NIL footprint, more money, etc... and the things he says in confidence with key people in Purdue's "NIL sphere" don't line up with what he's saying publicly.
But there is zero evidence that Purdue isn’t willing to pay its own. The collective sounds like it’s over 9 mil. If painter needs money, they will get it. Smith is probably over a mil this year. Idk where everyone is. Plus you have the profit sharing coming.
There is just nothing to base it on that everyone is leaving.
There is no game cut off. If you play one second, your redshirt is gone.
But let’s talk about these players. You’ve yet to say anything about the players besides rankings, which you admitted are not a perfect science.
Fan fiction. PU’s collective is less than that, and even it was $9M, that’s still not very good.
Painter needs money, and he is out asking for it, so apparently they are struggling to get it.
Similar threads
