Well, there was that time you did this:
Jackie Manuel still has nightmares of me!
Big 10 is gonna suck again.
- Thread starter lurkeraspect84
- Start date
Jackie Manuel still has nightmares of me!
Lmao, at what point was the stretch of dominance four decades ago under one coach something that just happened a long time ago and in no way whatsoever “the order”? 😂
TBH, I'd rather have OLD history, than NO history.
EvilMonkeyInTheCloset
Well-Known Member
Well then tell the other 350+ schools in D1 to let us f***ing win the tournament.............
EvilMonkeyInTheCloset
Well-Known Member
Agreed. Screw those losers.
I can't figure out what is going on with Purdon't. They have a legit beast in the paint, but last year, Painter surrounded him with a bunch of YMCA guys. If he could just get some legit guards to go with Edey, they would be incredible.
Well, we had a legit guard but he decided to declare and went 4th in the draft. And our other starting guard decided to transfer so we ended up starting two true freshmen.
I wouldn't call their backcourt YMCA. They were freshman and both looked really good till they petered out a bit towards the end of the season. As sophmores I would expect a big jump for both of them.
Which is a big mistake by Matt Painter. There's a transfer portal and he should have used it.
When I watched Purdue last year, I saw 4 Joes that couldn't create their own shot, or do much of anything at a high level… and Zach Edey. Not good.
I'm not sure what your roster is this year, but I hope for your sake, Matt brought in better guards and forwards.
I mean, for freshman, in a P5 conference, meh....they weren't to bad.
Loyer: 11ppg, 2.4apg....34% from three. 75% FT
Smith: 9ppg, 4rpg, 4apg, 1.2spg.......37% from three....88% FT
I was completely underwhelmed whenever I saw them and was not surprised they lost to a 16 seed the way they did.
They hit a wall---an expected wall. Both were really good until about midway through the B10; I think IU showed a recipe by pressuring them with bigger, stronger guards, making it tough for entry passes to Edey. JHS and Galloway gave those dudes problems.
I was surprised they lost---I mean, C'mon---16 beating a 1 has happened twice now is like 40 NCAAT's. However, I did feel FDU would give them issues with their speed, athleticism, BUT, felt they did not have the physical guards, bigger guards to give them issues others did. So pencil me in as someone who was FARLEIGH surprised they lost to a much, much smaller FDU team.
Take Edey off that team and they don't even qualify for the NIT. It was just a matter of time before someone figured out how to deny Edey the ball.
Niw, I didn't EXPECT Purdue to lose to a 16 seed, but I'm not surprised at it. They had 1 dude.
Tell me you know little about basketball outside Kentucky without telling me you know little about basketball outside Kentucky.
LOL, Purdue lost to a 16 seed bruh.
There was one other guy that averaged double digit points (Loyer averaged 11ppg) and if Edey wasn't there to take all the attention, he wouldn't average 11ppg.
Sorry, I know it's tough to hear (read), but I'm 100% right. The roster was heavily flawed, it was Zach Edey and a bunch of Joe's.
Hey, UK's roster was flawed too, even with Oscar and a lottery pick, we stunk (except when we played Tennessee and Auburn).
This is a hot take if I've ever seen one. LMAO!!! They would have dropped off quite a bit, yes, but going from a 1 seed to not making the NCAA at all? WOW!
I would also add MD showed the recipe as well for giving Purdue trouble last season guard wise.
Edey was that dominant.
You really can't say much man, you're team lost to a 16 seed. They took Edey away and made Purdue look pretty pedestrian.
Of course I can. To suggest that Purdue wouldn't have even been in the field without Edey is ridiculous. Purdue looked bad vs a 16 seed because they were unable to hit an open 3. If they didn't have a piss poor shooting night, they would have blew that team out. Unfortunately, towards the end of the season, the 3 point shooting was very up and down. That was a major down night.
Purdue makes the NCAAT....probably. But shooting was an issue----imgaine the toruble it would have really been had there been no Edey? He was the equlaizer. And that dominant. He was the reason Purdue was a #1 seed....that and the early play of your guards.
I'm not sold dumping them completely out of the NCAAT----but that team loses a lot of games without Edey.
I don't think you understand what it would mean if Purdue lost Edey last year. You had 1 guy that scored double digit ppg… one, take Edey away and now the defense doesn't have Andre the giant to put 3 guys on. That guy wouldn't get 11ppg.
I really believe Purdue was an NIT team without Edey last year. The supporting cast was average at best.
If you have to depend on a great 3 point shooting night to beat a 16 seed, you simply weren't very good.
Again, I'm not trying to be a dick, like I said, UK stunk too and they had a NPOY (Oscar) a lottery pick and 2 other future NBA players.
Is what it is.
Yes, I can't disagree with this. Now, I do think that TKR was effective enough that our shooters would still have had good looks. But like you said, shooting was or at least became an issue down the stretch.
I'd argue they'd lose probably 5-6 more games without Edey and be something around a 5-8 seed.
Last edited:
That's because Edey was the focus of the offense. Painter is very good at changing his offensive scheme to best suit the guys he has. If we lost Edey, Painter would have adjusted.
You're high on crack if you think Purdue was only NIT bound without Edey. You just are. Sorry but you have no idea how good the Freshman played the first half of the season. TKR would have picked up big minutes. He and Furst would have spit center duties and they probably make us a better defending team.
Never said you were being a dick. Not in the least. I just don't think you know wtf you're talking about when it came to this Purdue team.
I don't think it's far off saying without Edey they're an NIT game, not necessarily a given but they'd definitely be a bubble team. He was that dominate. Painter would have changed schemes but everyone else wouldn't have had the luxury of Edey being double teamed. They had a total of two guys shoot over 35% from 3, one of those 35.6, that's not going to do very well.
Who else would you say was a legit star besides Edey?
The BIG10 is too good a league to say Purdue would have made the tournament without Edey.
When I watched them play, it was Edey and a bunch of Joes. While Painter is a good coach, you can only adjust so much when you don't have top end talent. I just didn't see anyone else on that team that could get their own.
It certainly would have been interesting. Loyer and smith were really good early---then hit a wall. I like TKR, but he would not have demanded the respect Edey did. Not even close. Better defensively no doubt. Offensively though? Meh....Man I dunno.
NIT? Meh----I doubt that. Painter is really good. But man thats tough.
I mean shit, you remove TJD from IU, and boy we's in trouble.
Smith and Loyer were stars for most of the season. Loyer had a leg injury later in the season and Smith was tired because he didn't have much help at guard. There are plenty of other guys that were more than capable to step up and play well. Gillis hit 9 3's in a game. Furst and TKR are talented players. Newman had games that he took over and won for us. There's only one ball to go around. Edey got the bulk of the touches, but that's not to say that others couldn't have been effective enough for Purdue to have had a very good season still without him. This talk of Purdue being an NIT team without Edey is just laughable.
Yes, because you didn't have a decent backup for TJD. TKR was very efficient with the time he did get. I remember several games where we were quite effective when TKR was in. Furst is also a center that's been playing wing. Sounds like Furst and TKR are swapping positions this year.
Its not the back-up as much as the attention both deserved. Edey was almost always doubled---and at times triple teamed. Same with TJD---but not as much. Or maybe he was, Reneau though was a decent back-up TBH----6.7ppg/3.7rpg, in 14 minutes.
You take away either of those guys, and both teams drastically change.
I've seen Purdue teams in the past where you could see the shift if certain players weren't in the game. That just wasn't the case with this Purdue team. Yes, it wasn't the same team without Edey, but I don't recall one game where the other team suddenly had an advantage over us when Edey wasn't in the game. If I recall correctly, in some of our biggest wins we made a lead with Edey on the bench.
276th in 3pt%, with all that attention on Edey. That's bad.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
The SEC is shaping up to be a tough Conference
- Latest: Demarcus Kidd-Miller