*Official* B1G In-Season Thread
- Thread starter boilerzz
- Start date
Our ban bet is still on MJ18. It doesn't matter if you create a new account. Your hot takes are still banned. Go away.
Really was a good find by Klize. I didn't put it together, but now it's beyond obvious.
The people who rate titties are also held in higher regard than Joe Lunardi and Jerry Palm.
Edit: Jerry Palm sounds like someone who would rate titties
In my opinion, when you have a valid argument, dropping hyperbole makes you look inferior and lacking in credibility.
Lol. Uh, so, three of the starters who played the majority of minutes, were four star players. How is that a "team full of three stars"? Vince Edwards was a four star according to ESPN and the 247 Composite. So that's now four, four star guys of which three were the major contributors on the team. So again, your original take of a team of 3 star was a lie. No need to lie. Your take was wrong. Own it. The majority of those three star players didn't actually play. Literally three of the five starters last year were four star recruits. LOOOOOOL.
Dude, I get it man. But at some point posters like the guy I'm dealing with now just need to be laughed at. He said Painter took a team full of 3 star players to 30 wins. He was wrong. It's not accurate. He's standing by it. Literally nothing I could say is going to change his mind so I'm having fun with it. Don't take everything I say so seriously man. Lighten up every now and again. This is supposed to be for fun.
I've had an idea for a bit but couldn't confirm. Its blatantly obvious now.
Um... only two were starters. V. Edwards was a 3 star per Rivals. So even IF you say he's a four star, which he was borderline at best, then possibly 3 starters were 4 star. Eastern wasn't a starter. As I said before, he barely contributed. You forget to mention a walk on getting major minutes too. I get it, you are biased. So am I, but I'm at least TRYING to be realistic. You're just being a hater.
I think if it weren't for this new metric that the committee is using, that they would be more heavily talked about as a bubble team.
Look at who they beat:
Non-Conference
UMKC - 235
Green Bay - 206
Oregon - 49 (This has not been your typical Oregon team either)
UCONN - 102
Alabama St. - 328
Pitt - 97
ISU - 22
No. Iowa - 178
Western Carolina - 272
Savannah St - 272
Bryant - 326
Conference
Nebraska - 44
NW (2x) - 77
OSU - 45
PSU - 39
Illinois - 78
Michigan - 6
Indiana (2x) - 41
Rutgers - 79
Let's dig deeper into their conference wins.
They beat one team that won 20 games or more in conference, Michigan. The record of all of the other conference wins were 122-129 and 55-105 B10.
They lost 5 out of their last 6 and 5 of their last 8. The 3 they beat in the last 8 were Indiana, Rutgers, and NW. Indiana was in OT. Rutgers and NW were buzzer beaters.
It's not very impressive, and it's more a reflection on how bad the field is than anything that they will be in the tournament.
And those three four star players, who were starters, played the majority of the minutes at their positions and contributed significantly. All those three star players you mentioned, most of them didn't play or contribute much at all. So your original take was a lie.
not me I am happy with this season. I never picked Iowa to win 20+ games this season. I also stated before this season I was saying that I was taking a wait and see approach. stating that if this team did what they did last season I would be in favor of firing Fran but if he has a winning record over all. then keep him.
its amazing what having a true SR Leader and SO's becoming JR's can do to Teams success. next season the JR's become SR's,
the only difference between next season SR's will have these for backups
RSJR Pemsl
RSSO Nunge
RSSO Connor
RSFR Fredrick
FR Toussaint
FR Patrick
vs 6 FR of which only Moss made it to his SR year. some left because of grades, a couple left because of being home sick and 1 just flat out quit on his teammates 1 week before their 1st game.
Umm, Mathias, Thompson, Cline, Eifert, Haarms didn't play much nor contribute? Are you dense? I even removed V. Edwards just for you. That was the majority of our offense. So now I'm lying because I listed the rest of the roster makeup? Who do you think the starters scrimmage against? Who cares if some of them didn't play much. We were still a vast majority of 3 star players. The vast majority of our production came from 3 star guys.
Last edited:
What is to be made of the rumors swirling around Cook and Wieskamp as these are the players Iowa needs most
If it said what you wanted to say, it would be an authority. Because it doesn't, you found someone who does. He does a fantastic job. Got 100% on his predictions the year prior.
Do you not understand what I've proven? Your point was neither Izzo nor Beilein have taken a team full of three star players to 30 wins. Well, we now know neither has Painter. Beilein's Final Four teams weren't full of five star players. Izzo's teams aren't always full of five star players. You keep acting like there is this HUGE recruiting difference between the three coaches. There is a difference, for sure, but it's not nearly as large as you hope it is. Not to mention, I would give Izzo and Beilein an added bonus of dealing with all that turnover and still fielding competitive teams consistently. So, regardless of what you say, it's beyond clear and not close that Beilein and Izzo are significantly better all around coaches than Painter. Painter isn't on their level. He's not that close and most college basketball fans would overwhelmingly agree.
Cook should not leave as he needs to work on a mid range shot. but other than him, nobody is going to leave. or has reason to leave.
Seems a bit extreme, IMO. Let's just start with apathy.
You haven't proven anything, LOL. You just can't handle the fact that Painter took a team that was MAJORITY 3 star players and won 30 games. Even IF V. Edwards is a 4 star guy, which at least one recruiting service didn't think he was. The roster was still majority 3 star guys. Production was majority 3 star guys. You just can't face those facts.
LOL at you with this 5 star garbage again. I've literally never said anything about 5 star guys. If you don't think there's a huge recruiting difference between mid to high 4 star players and high 3 star players then you aren't very smart when it comes to basketball.
Uh, so the top three scorers on the team last year were four star guys. Two of the three four star starters were tops in minutes played. Two of the three four star starters were the top two rebounders. Two of the three four star starters were second and third in assists.
Yikes man. Did you even look at anything prior to posting or did you just assume?
The bottom line is the talent disparity isn't nearly as wide as you hope it was. Painter didn't take a team full of three stars to 30 wins. That's inaccurate, as I've proven here.
I don't have time to do the full research but I'm pretty confident in saying that if you ranked the starting lineups for the last ten years for MSU, Michigan and Purdue by average 247 composite ranking, Purdue would be 3rd by a decent amount.
Using star rankings is flawed because there can be a pretty big disparity between the 30th ranked 4 star and the 120th ranked 4 star.
Just quickly, in the last decade according to 247 Sports:
Top 25 commits
Purdue - 1
MSU - 7
Michigan - 1
Top 50 commits
Purdue - 1
MSU - 11
Michigan - 6
Top 100 commits
Purdue - 8
MSU - 20
Michigan - 13
https://247sports.com/college/purdue/Sport/Basketball/AllTimeRecruits/
https://247sports.com/college/michigan-state/Sport/Basketball/AllTimeRecruits/
https://247sports.com/college/michigan/Sport/Basketball/AllTimeRecruits/
Using star rankings is flawed because there can be a pretty big disparity between the 30th ranked 4 star and the 120th ranked 4 star.
Just quickly, in the last decade according to 247 Sports:
Top 25 commits
Purdue - 1
MSU - 7
Michigan - 1
Top 50 commits
Purdue - 1
MSU - 11
Michigan - 6
Top 100 commits
Purdue - 8
MSU - 20
Michigan - 13
https://247sports.com/college/purdue/Sport/Basketball/AllTimeRecruits/
https://247sports.com/college/michigan-state/Sport/Basketball/AllTimeRecruits/
https://247sports.com/college/michigan/Sport/Basketball/AllTimeRecruits/
Iowa went 5-5 in their last 10 which is exactly the number that was predicted on HR.
lets also put the teams in order of their rankings
Michigan #6
PSU #39
Indiana #41 2X
Nebraska #44
OSU #45
that makes 6 wins vs top 45 teams never knew that beating top 45 teams = a poor schedule.
NW #77 2X
OSU #78 split
Rutgers #79 split.
that made 3 wins and 2 losses vs #51-80, again never heard of losing to teams in the 51-100 range being bad wins or losses.
Yup. Don't disagree with the overall point that Purdue would rank third behind those two. However, it doesn't take into account the NBA attrition MSU and UM have dealt with which I would believe make the rosters balance out a bit more evenly between the three.
also there are just 2 teams in the 300's which is not as bad as other teams, coming off a 14 win season this was not a bad schedule. AND NOBODY schedules a murderers row of teams in their OOC,
this season there were 10 BT teams projected to make the NCAAT. maybe they get 9 at most but more likely they get 8 teams in,
then you need to rethink your stance on who Iowa beat and lost too
this season there were 10 BT teams projected to make the NCAAT. maybe they get 9 at most but more likely they get 8 teams in,
then you need to rethink your stance on who Iowa beat and lost too
Fair point and I agree. That's why I wish I had the time to do a ranking of starting lineups by program by year.
Maybe you can explain it to him. I've said Painter is the third best coach in the league right now. Considering that's behind two of the best in the country, I think that's some pretty big props. I also think Painter is likely a Top 25 coach. Just because I (along with most other college basketball fans more than likely) honestly don't think it's close between him and Beilein/Izzo right now, he's literally flying off the rails.
Dude, this is IF you can claim Vince as a four star. Which you can't definitively. If you don't include Vince at all the 3 star minutes played = 3788. 4 star minutes played = 2377. Even IF you add Vince in as a 4 star the minutes played = 3483. The vast majority of minutes was by 3 star guys.
Illinois has 5 wins against the top 45 and is 4-3 against 51-80, for perspective. You've beat almost nobody.
And I've agreed with this, but your words make it sound as if he's several tiers below.
Similar threads
