Isn't that what I'm saying about Romeo? He might be above all of that. I just know that Pitino has been outed. And a lot of posters claim Drew has to be cheating.
Oh the irony of a Purdue fan talking about this shite, all without even a single mention of the thousands and thousands of pork chops that have been assaulted by Matt painter in 2018 alone. #thoughtsandprayerswiththeporkchops
Are you a moron? This team has very little talent. If Crean was still here they wouldn't even be competitive in most of these games. Give him a few years to get some talent in and a IU will be a top 20 team every year and a potential title winner every 3 or 4. This guy knows what he's doing and it's obvious to anyone that knows basketball. ..you obviously do not!
He truly believes that constantly shouting/typing “I DO NOT TOLERATE MEDIOCRITY!!!” is productive and will bring about instant championships.
Then why are you giving Tom Allen a free pass?
Bottom 4?! What? You really need to get outside the IU bubble and go look at some other teams. Big Ten is terrible this year. We’re easily somewhere in the middle.IU's roster as it is currently ranks in the bottom 4 of the Big 10 by my Talent + Experience ratings. So, I would agree that they are playing pretty well all considered.
However, if we rewind back to the preseason and compare IU's roster to that of PU's, I'm thinking that I would have held Crean to the standard of an NCAA bid at the least, if he were still at the helm. Even the loss of Deron wouldn't have eased my criticism of Crean because the depth issue in the frontcourt was of his own making. First year coaches, however, must be viewed through a more forgiving lens for obvious reasons imo.
All that said, here's a look at the pre-season IU and PU rosters with star rankings from the 3 services used at verbalcommits.com. I've broke them into tiers, bolded upperclassmen and highlighted the 3 IU players that aren't available currently. I see people refer to Juwan as a 3-star all the time, but he was in fact a 4-star by two of the three services and was ranked #108 by the service that gave him the 3-star label. In short Morgan was as close to being a consensus 4-star recruit as you can get. Notice also that Purdue only has two players on it's roster more highly rated than Josh Newkirk, who was rated higher than V. Edwards by two of the 3 services.
IU's roster as it is currently ranks in the bottom 4 of the Big 10 by my Talent + Experience ratings. So, I would agree that they are playing pretty well all considered.
However, if we rewind back to the preseason and compare IU's roster to that of PU's, I'm thinking that I would have held Crean to the standard of an NCAA bid at the least, if he were still at the helm. Even the loss of Deron wouldn't have eased my criticism of Crean because the depth issue in the frontcourt was of his own making. First year coaches, however, must be viewed through a more forgiving lens for obvious reasons imo.
All that said, here's a look at the pre-season IU and PU rosters with star rankings from the 3 services used at verbalcommits.com. I've broke them into tiers, bolded upperclassmen and highlighted the 3 IU players that aren't available currently. I see people refer to Juwan as a 3-star all the time, but he was in fact a 4-star by two of the three services and was ranked #108 by the service that gave him the 3-star label. In short Morgan was as close to being a consensus 4-star recruit as you can get. Notice also that Purdue only has two players on it's roster more highly rated than Josh Newkirk, who was rated higher than V. Edwards by two of the 3 services.
Interesting. Thanks for sharing. What stats do you use? So the only change pre season to mid year is the pre season you were assuming minutes based on last year and then mid season you go with actual minutes? How do you project Freshmen minutes in preseason?
After losing Davis we're about equal to Crean year three.
Thanks again for sharing. I can tell this takes some time. What were the mid season Big Ten rankings? Just curious how it compares to the actual standings. I’m curious where Purdue, Michigan State, and Ohio State shake out.
I’m not saying I don’t believe in him long term. Far from it. But right now we sit at 13-12 and 6-7 in an absolutely pathetic conference. With the experience we had coming back I expected better. At least another 3-4 wins. And not losses to ISU, FW, and Illinois.
Thanks so much for the clear description and the hard work. Was wondering, without digging into it in depth...how does it take into consideration the difficult schedule? I think Archie is doing better than I had expected, minimizing that in the beginning ISU & Ft Wayne games were devastating...which I had not expected. I had hoped they would be a bubble team and...they might just be. So I am not at all sad about the year. (Given IU should never be in this position...but it is and the threes suck and the free throws are an historical low.)Btw, here is the updated Big Ten chart. The roster scores have all been converted to an approx. Sagarin Rating. Up until this season, I had given out hard copies to some people at work and they liked the conversion to Sagarin better than a lot of numbers that I had to explain.
Hopefully, it's pretty much self explanatory, but here's a brief rundown. The November column is just the starting point for each team at the beginning of the season.
Depending on the youthfulness of the roster, some teams can be expected to improve more than others as the season progresses. The Projected February column is attempt to predict the improvement by the time February rolls around.
The third column (February) is where I recalculate based on which players are actually getting the real life minutes. Injuries, transfers and recruiting busts can sometimes drastically alter those November expectations.
The fourth column (actual) is just the current real-life Sagarin Rating. I usually just do this at Tournament time, but I went ahead and plugged it in so you could see how it works.
The last column is called Coaching, because it captures the difference between expectations and reality. Right or wrong, I either blame or applaud coaches for the number in this column. Where IU is concerned I usually will dig much deeper to try to understand what went right or wrong, but I don't have time for that for the rest of the country... vbg
Since I've been doing this Painter and Beilein have typically far exceeded the rosters. They've each had a failure or two here and there, but this year is fairly common. One thing I like about IU is over the last 10 games they are averaging an 84 performance level, whereas the first 15 games they only averaged 76.
Anyway... here it is... and the teams are sorted by the Feb column, which is the roster strength as of Feb. 2nd. This goes against my "bottom 4" comment earlier in the thread, but I mentally (out of habit) always move Painter and Beilein a few notches, which puts IU among the bottom rungers.
Great stuff. Thanks for sharing. Pretty amazing what Painter has assembled at a school like Purdue. And I’ve always considered Beilein a great coach for the talent he gets. This supports that.Btw, here is the updated Big Ten chart. The roster scores have all been converted to an approx. Sagarin Rating. Up until this season, I had given out hard copies to some people at work and they liked the conversion to Sagarin better than a lot of numbers that I had to explain.
Hopefully, it's pretty much self explanatory, but here's a brief rundown. The November column is just the starting point for each team at the beginning of the season.
Depending on the youthfulness of the roster, some teams can be expected to improve more than others as the season progresses. The Projected February column is attempt to predict the improvement by the time February rolls around.
The third column (February) is where I recalculate based on which players are actually getting the real life minutes. Injuries, transfers and recruiting busts can sometimes drastically alter those November expectations.
The fourth column (actual) is just the current real-life Sagarin Rating. I usually just do this at Tournament time, but I went ahead and plugged it in so you could see how it works.
The last column is called Coaching, because it captures the difference between expectations and reality. Right or wrong, I either blame or applaud coaches for the number in this column. Where IU is concerned I usually will dig much deeper to try to understand what went right or wrong, but I don't have time for that for the rest of the country... vbg
Since I've been doing this Painter and Beilein have typically far exceeded the rosters. They've each had a failure or two here and there, but this year is fairly common. One thing I like about IU is over the last 10 games they are averaging an 84 performance level, whereas the first 15 games they only averaged 76.
Anyway... here it is... and the teams are sorted by the Feb column, which is the roster strength as of Feb. 2nd. This goes against my "bottom 4" comment earlier in the thread, but I mentally (out of habit) always move Painter and Beilein a few notches, which puts IU among the bottom rungers.
How the hell has Tom Allen been a train wreck? See, this is why no one takes you seriously. It’s one thing to express concerns. But you don’t do that. You go completely over the top. The guy went 5-7 in his first year. They blew a ton of leads. The two seasons prior to him taking over were both 6-6, and they blew a ton of leads. It was essentially the same team. He also just hauled in a really good recruiting class. THAT’S a trainwreck? For Indiana freaking Football? We’ve been to 11 bowls in 125 years. I guess I’m going to need you to define “trainwreck” for me.
Not all fixable. Freddie gives great effort, but have never seen anyone miss more one-foot shots in my life.
I like the distinction you make, although I think "stink" is not the best choice of words IMHO.
