ADVERTISEMENT

Why is "Edey is just tall" such a controversial take?

SqueakyClean said:
I'm still not necessarily on board with the "He can't shoot" narrative either.
Click to expand...

SqueakyClean said:
Is shooting free-throws a skill? Edey currently shoots a hair over 70%. If that is not a skill, then that's a bad sign for IU because Ware, Reneau, Sparks, Banks, Cupps, Galloway, and X are all then not skilled either (as their FT% is sub 70%).
Click to expand...

He shoots at a decent rate comparative to the volume of free throws he takes. He won't a) get that whistle at the next level and b) won't ever play extended minutes at the next level to shoot that volume. Percentage wise 70% is meh. I'm talking about living shooting in a game action, not laying the ball up over a defender 5-6 inches shorter than him 2 feet from the rim. How many times has he made a shot beyond 10 feet? I recall one, a banked 3 against Indiana that he missed so bad that it went in.

SqueakyClean said:
Edey is option football. Nobody in the NBA uses his skill set anymore because the stretch 4 who can defend the basket and take shots from behind the arc is more efficient than a back-to-the-basket center. That does not mean that he does not have skills, it just means that the skills he has don't translate to what the majority of the upper-level teams use.
Click to expand...
There's plenty of bigs in the NBA who only score around the basket, they're called rim runners. But those guys can also defend out to the 3 point line and hold their own when they get switched out on a smaller guard. Edey can't do that. There's plenty of 7+ footers in the NBA, more than in any previous era. But they all possess real basketball skills. Big "big" isn't a basketball skill.
 
apm1003 said:
If I were you, I would not be calling other people "....the biggest dope in college basketball..." Since the beginning of the 2016-17 season, Purdue under Painter has gotten to the Sweet 16 four times and moved to the Elite 8 once. That is simply a fact. There were 2 Sweet 16 appearances before that as well. You obviously are ignorant about his performance as indicated by your post.
Click to expand...
He's literally 411 out of 415 college basketball coaches in PASE since 2000. He's a dope.

 
IndyResident16 said:
He shoots at a decent rate comparative to the volume of free throws he takes. He won't a) get that whistle at the next level and b) won't ever play extended minutes at the next level to shoot that volume. Percentage wise 70% is meh.
Click to expand...
Again, you are translating NBA with college. 70% would be bottom 25% in the NBA, but it is still better than average at college level and sadly, still better than most of the IU roster. You say he has no skill besides being tall but still shoots free throws better than over half of his collegiate peers and that has nothing to do with his height / size.


IndyResident16 said:
I'm talking about living shooting in a game action, not laying the ball up over a defender 5-6 inches shorter than him 2 feet from the rim. How many times has he made a shot beyond 10 feet? I recall one, a banked 3 against Indiana that he missed so bad that it went in.
Click to expand...
The answer is, I have no idea, because he hasn't every really had the need to. If you have the ability to get within 2' of the basket and can make your shots at a 63% clip, and your ultimate goal is to win the game, why would you take shots from beyond that point?

Is the goal for Zach to showcase his ability to get to the NBA, or is it to make sure that Purdue has the larger score at the end of the game? If you have the ability to bully your way into the paint and guarantee points versus taking a lower percentage shot from 6' away, heck yes, go for the higher percentage shot.

In pregame warm-ups, he has shot jump shots from beyond 6' but that's not the same as in-game-play, so I don't have any basis to really judge. I don't have access to analytics that show every shot he has taken, but outside of the two 3pt attempts, everything else has been within 5'-ish in every game I've seen of him (haven't watched them all, but probably seen 20 - for the record, my wife is a Purdue grad, so we watch both IU and Purdue games. I've probably also seen at least a dozen MSU, Illinois, and OSU games each). The percentages of shots from 5' away are lower, but I don't think it's as bad as you are saying. Thinking 40% to 45%-ish. Which yeah, that's not 63%, but it's still not bad.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BleedinGold
He may never play a minute in the NBA. How many of the players who brought three banners to Bloomington were very good to great NBA players? I know quite a few who were very good to great college players.
Edey has been a major part of teams that have won more than 100 games in four years and has won two Big Ten regular season titles and one Big Ten Tournament title and is a likely two time POY and consensus All American.
Who would not wish to have a recruit ranked 440th in his class who could achieve at that level?
 
IndyResident16 said:
I know what a skill is. I'm asking what specific basketball skill he possesses, not whether or not he has mastered the skill of walking or talking or tying his shoe.
Click to expand...
I’m trying to remember how many number one seeds Manute Bol and the university of Bridgeport had while he was there.
 
SaratogaBoiler1 said:
How’s this - who cares - you are still so wrong it’s laughable
Click to expand...
Bottom line: if he played for IU he'd be the greatest ever. Just like those idiots who knocked Yogi. I'd have killed for Yogi. Same for TJD. Im
Guilty of saying he was the most protected player in the BIG. That said I would have loved him as a Boiler.
Who knows if he wins a championship.
Hes big obviously. He's worked hard to get where he is. Ranked 431 in his class. Anyone could have recruited him.
In the NBA he will be a role player. Right now so is TJD. Both fine college players.
It's not a knock on either player.
 
IndyResident16 said:
What am I wrong about? Please tell me a real basketball skill that he possesses? What's his shooting percentage outside 5 feet? His dribbling skills? Passing? If he had any real basketball skill he would have been in the NBA two years ago. And clearly you care, you're 10 comments deep.
Click to expand...
I guess what you say echoes a lot of what was said about TJD. Especially cant shoot from outside. TJD never did. Woodson would have been an idiot and so would Painter.
Shoot more than 5 feet out. Did you ever see TJD?
And Edey is above 70% from 15 feet.
Just appreciate how god both ate.
 
choptalk said:
I guess what you say echoes a lot of what was said about TJD. Especially cant shoot from outside. TJD never did. Woodson would have been an idiot and so would Painter.
Shoot more than 5 feet out. Did you ever see TJD?
And Edey is above 70% from 15 feet.
Just appreciate how god both ate.
Click to expand...
Both were very good players, who has said otherwise? TJD could dribble ball and pass the basketball. He has a real basketball skill set as evident playing major minutes in the NBA after nearly going undrafted.
 
IndyResident16 said:
He's literally 411 out of 415 college basketball coaches in PASE since 2000. He's a dope.

Click to expand...
You base your claim that Painter is a "dope" on the metric Performance Against Seed Expectations (PASE.) That metric is a function of assigned seeding. To rely on that metric to make a judgment means that seeding needs to be reasonably accurate. If seeding is faulty, then the PASE is not reliable as a meaningful measure.

When a team outperforms its seed there are three possibilities:
1. it was seeded too low;
2. its opponent was seeded too high;
3. some combination of the first two.

I looked at the last 10 NCAA Tournaments. The NCAA seeds early the Top 16, so I looked to see how many outside the Top 16 made it to the Elite8 and Final4. That means that any outside the Top 4 in a region has exceeded seeding by at least 2 rounds. I will define an Error in Seeding as a team outside the Top4 in a region showing up in the E8 and F4 as a seeding error.

Here is the data:

2023 E8: 5 (2), 6, 9 F4: 5(2), 9 Error Rate: E8 50%, F4: 75%
2022 E8: 5, 8, 10, 15 F4: 8 Error Rate: E8: 50%, F4: 25%
2021 E8: 6, 11, 12 F4: 11 Error Rate: E8: 38%, F4: 25%
2019 E8: 5 F4: 5 Error Rate: E8: 13%, F4: 25%
2018 E8: 9 (2), 11 F4: 11 Error Rate: E8: 38% F4: 25%
2017 E8: 7, 11 F4: 7 Error Rate: E8 25% F4: 25%
2016 E8: 6, 10 F4: 10 Error Rate: E8: 25% F4: 25%
2015 E8: 7 F4: 7 Error Rate: E8: 13% F4: 25%
2014 E8: 7, 8, 11 F4: 7, 8 Error Rate: E8: 38% F4: 50%
2013 E8: 9 f4: 9 Error Rate: E8: 13% F4: 25%

As can be seen, the error rate for seeding is fairly high. For the Elite8, the average error rate exceeds 30% and the same is true for the Final4. To rely on a measure with a 30% or more error rate and expect to get any meaningful insight is foolhardy. So much for the "dope" judgment.

If you go to today's CBSsports.com website, in the discussion of coaches in the tournament, Painter is described by the experts there as elite. That is somewhat diametrically opposed to your view.
 
Last edited:
apm1003 said:
You base your claim that Painter is a "dope" on the metric Performance Against Seed Expectations (PASE.) That metric is a function of assigned seeding. To rely on that metric to make a judgment means that seeding needs to be reasonably accurate. If seeding is faulty, then the PASE is not reliable as a meaningful measure.

When a team outperforms its seed there are three possibilities:
1. it was seeded too low;
2. its opponent was seeded too high;
3. some combination of the first two.

I looked at the last 10 NCAA Tournaments. The NCAA seeds early the Top 16, so I looked to see how many outside the Top 16 made it to the Elite8 and Final4. That means that any outside the Top 4 in a region has exceeded seeding by at least 2 rounds. I will define an Error in Seeding as a team outside the Top4 in a region showing up in the E8 and F4 as a seeding error.

Here is the data:

2023 E8: 5 (2), 6, 9 F4: 5(2), 9 Error Rate: E8 50%, F4: 75%
2022 E8: 5, 8, 10, 15 F4: 8 Error Rate: E8: 50%, F4: 25%
2021 E8: 6, 11, 12 F4: 11 Error Rate: E8: 38%, F4: 25%
2019 E8: 5 F4: 5 Error Rate: E8: 25%, F4: 25%
2018 E8: 9 (2), 11 F4: 11 Error Rate: E8: 38% F4: 25%
2017 E8: 7, 11 F4: 7 Error Rate: E8 38% F4: 25%
2016 E8: 6, 10 F4: 10 Error Rate: E8: 25% F4: 25%
2015 E8: 7 F4: 7 Error Rate: E8: 13% F4: 25%
2014 E8: 7, 8, 11 F4: 7, 8 Error Rate: E8: 38% F4: 50%
2013 E8: 9 f4: 9 Error Rate: E8: 25% F4: 25%

As can be seen, the error rate for seeding is fairly high. For the Elite8, the average error rate exceeds 30% and the same is true for the Final4. To rely on a measure with a 30% or more error rate and expect to get any meaningful insight is foolhardy. So much for the "dope" judgment.

If you go to today's CBSsports.com website, in the discussion of coaches in the tournament, Painter is described by the experts there as elite. That is somewhat diametrically opposed to your view.
Click to expand...
What makes Painter elite? He hasn't won shit. Look at the coaches at the top of PASE.........all winners, all considered elite.
 
Painter can’t coach and Edey is just tall with no skills! You want to bet who finishes higher in the Conference next year when Edey is gone?
 
SaratogaBoiler1 said:
Painter can’t coach and Edey is just tall with no skills! You want to bet who finishes higher in the Conference next year when Edey is gone?
Click to expand...
What makes Painter elite? Answer the question please. What has he won that would place him in the same tier of coaches who have won something of significance?
 
Well I asked you a question first - take the bet? If he’s such a bad coach there is no way he can win without just tall Edey right?
 
IndyResident16 said:
What makes Painter elite? Answer the question please. What has he won that would place him in the same tier of coaches who have won something of significance?
Click to expand...
I mean you have another 5 star - should be an easy win for you - Painter stinks and you will have the most talented player on the floor - easy money
 
BleedinGold said:
You would think so, but that's not the case.

Getting in position isn't just about size. It's way more than that. If it was just about size every big dude would dominate the boards and thats not the case. But Edey has broken the career rebounding record at Purdue not just because of his size but because he has the additional intangible skills that go into it.

You aren't reinventing the wheel you are just over simplifying it and choosing to ignore everything else besides Edey's size that make him so dominant. Simply saying he does X because of his size when it's not just his size. It's his size + effort + IQ + conditioning + skill.

There is a reason guys like Caleb Swanigan or Dennis Rodman for the NBA folks were elite rebounders. Both dudes who dominated on the glass at well under 7' because they shared the same skills Edey possesses. Edey's size helps, but it's not the only thing.

Anyone who just can only mention "size" as the reason Edey is dominant is being over simplistic and aren't accounting for all of the rest that goes into it.
Click to expand...
Did you seriously put Caleb Swanigan and Dennis Rodman in the same rebounding thought?
 
Because he is unathletic and because he's not actually especially skilled at anything.
He just outmuscles people, which he wouldn't be able to do in the EuroLeague, even, let alone the NBA.

He doesn't stretch the floor, he doesn't make anything beyond the most basic passing reads out of the post and yet still has a terrible assist-to-turnover ratio, and he's already very exploitable even at the college level defensively in the P&R by guards with even average athleticism. NBA players, even bench players, will target him and feast on him relentlessly and play him off the floor more often than not.

He is the epitome of a great college player whose professional ceiling is being a well below-average pro at best. Of which there have been tons of examples before him, and there will be tons to come after him.
 
apm1003 said:
When a team outperforms its seed there are three possibilities:
1. it was seeded too low;
2. its opponent was seeded too high;
3. some combination of the first two.
Click to expand...
4. The other team improved over season results.
5. The other team simply got lucky.
6. The other team overperformed.
7. The matchups favored the opponent.
8. Injuries.
9. The team Purdue'd the game away. (Pissed down their own legs as the lights became brighter.)
 
Last edited:
T.M.P. said:
4. The other team improved over season results.
5. The other team simply got lucky.
6. The other team overperformed.
7. The matchups favored the opponent.
8. Injuries.
9. The team Purdue'd the game away. (Pissed down their own legs as the lights became brighter.)
Click to expand...
With regard to your 4-10: since tournament seeding occurs within a week of a team's last game, it is rather hard to expect dramatic change over a few days compared to their season's performance. As for injuries, I thought that the Committee took those into consideration when seeding. Luck is simply randomness, and a metric with a large error rate obviously has a high degree of randomness implicit in it.

As for matchups, you are looking at a minimum of 3 wins to get to the E8. You will have beaten 3 different teams with different characteristics. While matchups can be a serious influence in a particular game, it is difficult to extrapolate that over a sequence. You are also facing 3 different coaches.

The simple answer is to recognize that the data demonstrates that trying to gain a performance insight through seeding will not get you very good results. Hence PASE is essentially meaningless.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: tbird2017
apm1003 said:
With regard to your 4-10: since tournament seeding occurs within a week of a team's last game, it is rather hard to expect dramatic change over a few days compared to their season's performance. As for injuries, I thought that the Committee took those into consideration when seeding. Luck is simply randomness, and a metric with a large error rate obviously has a high degree of randomness implicit in it.

As for matchups, you are looking at a minimum of 3 wins to get to the E8. You will have beaten 3 different teams with different characteristics. While matchups can be a serious influence in a particular game, it is difficult to extrapolate that over a sequence.

The simple answer is to recognize that the data demonstrates that trying to gain a performance insight through seeding will not get your very good results. Hence PASE is essentially meaningless.















;
Click to expand...
The top coaches in the college profession, both past and present, are all at the top of the PASE chart. That isn’t a coincidence. They win in March, period, that’s why they’re up there. Painter doesn’t and there’s a 20 year sample size.
 
Please explain how you can rely upon a metric which has a high error rate implicit in it as valid in determining anything. Or do you believe that seeding is reliable? Or do you not believe that the data set is real?

I am puzzled. I was always taught that a bad data set led to unreliable conclusions.
 
Why do you go away from the original question and segue to the NBA. Most Purdue fans recognize that his game doesn’t translate to the NBA . Maybe because you don’t have a good answer. Wonder how you would describe him if he played for IU?
HoosierJimbo89 said:
There is the minor league and the major league. We will see how he does in the majors.
Click to expand...
 
SeniorBoilerFan said:
Why do you go away from the original question and segue to the NBA. Most Purdue fans recognize that his game doesn’t translate to the NBA . Maybe because you don’t have a good answer. Wonder how you would describe him if he played for IU?
Click to expand...
Win big game, run to IU board.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Courtsensetwo
SeniorBoilerFan said:
Why do you go away from the original question and segue to the NBA. Most Purdue fans recognize that his game doesn’t translate to the NBA . Maybe because you don’t have a good answer. Wonder how you would describe him if he played for IU?
Click to expand...
Most IU fans would describe Edey the same way if he played for us. This is the difference between the two fanbases. One is confident while the other is insecure. We see it here every day v
 
Edey had been playing on an upswing, but he sucked tonight. One of those games where he was just tall. Braden Smith was brilliant.
 
Courtsensetwo said:
Most IU fans would describe Edey the same way if he played for us. This is the difference between the two fanbases. One is confident while the other is insecure. We see it here every day v
Click to expand...
Courtsensetwo, you made me laugh out loud. What in gods name makes you think IU fans are confident in this program. Have you not looked at the past months posts
 
IndyResident16 said:
What does that have to do with anything? Edey is a good basketball player, I literally said that in my intro. But the fact remains that his size is by far and away his greatest skill set. I don’t understand why that’s such a controversial take.
Click to expand...
It's not. His size is absolutely a major factor. What Purdue fans get upset with when someone says "he's just tall" it's making a statement that his ONLY attribute is that he's tall and that's why he's good. If they made statements like, he wouldn't be AS good if he were shorter, that's a totally different argument and would be true. It's the word "just" that gets used in the original argument. It eliminates any other possible characteristics. There have been plenty of tall and big guys, but none of them have been as good or dominant as Edey. So no, he's not "just" tall. But yes, it is a major factor as to why he's this good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411 and tbird2017
13thman said:
Did you seriously put Caleb Swanigan and Dennis Rodman in the same rebounding thought?
Click to expand...

Lol. I just grabbed two elite rebounders from each level to show that height isn't the primary factor when rebounding. Admittingly Swanigan isn't in the same stratosphere as Rodman in that regard, but Swanni was a top notch rebounder at the college level.
 
IndyResident16 said:
He's a dominant college player almost exclusively due to his size. He's not a highly skilled basketball player, his size overcompensates in that regard. He wouldn't do half the things he does if he was 6'9. It's not a controversial take.
Click to expand...
The commentators for the game last night had a message just for you and your fellow IU fans that believe this: "Anyone that thinks Edey is just tall and has no basketball skills knows nothing about the game of basketball"
 
  • Like
Reactions: SaratogaBoiler1 and Boilermaker03
Hmmm, let's see.

On one hand, you've got bunches of current and former coachers calling Edey a generational TALENT

And on the other, you've got some pile of goo on a message board, called Indy Resident 16, saying he's just big.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SaratogaBoiler1
MichaelRR said:
The commentators for the game last night had a message just for you and your fellow IU fans that believe this: "Anyone that thinks Edey is just tall and has no basketball skills knows nothing about the game of basketball"
Click to expand...
Steve Lappas and all his infinite wisdom likely didn’t know what state he was in last night. Edey’s lack of basketball skills were on full display last night in yet another game he dominated. Why? BECAUSE HE’S JUST TALL.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: MichaelRR
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back