@kkott he had 2 games with 42 points in that tournament. The others close to 30. He was good all year long. But not THAT good. Jeeze. And Jordan?? He won titles when he had good teammates around him, and didn’t need to score 50-60 to win those games.
@middawg Luck has nothing to do with it. I didn't see anyone else going after a 7'3" guy from Canada. Just one of many examples.
I would rather ingest shards of glass than praise Purdue, but truth is truth.
@gthomas Two things can be true... Painter has proven to have an eye for big man talent, and then developing them well. Hammons was solid, Williams was good, Haas became pretty good, obviously Edey, TKR... But then its also true that Edey was an anomaly. He ended up Shaq like in his dominance, but came in to college more like Todd Lindeman. That's insane growth and development. Recruiting and development isn't an exact science. So when someone like Edey rolls around, that isn't obviously dominant coming in to college, then develops to be, there is an element of luck involved.
@iunorth Then Painter is pretty good at being lucky. Hopefully, IU will find luck with its latest hire. I have my doubts.
@gthomas because he's been Purdue's coach for twenty years and has been to 1 Final Four? Why, on earth, would any IU fan sign up for 20 more years of no national titles. With only a handful of those 20 years having teams capable of winning one?
Obviously if we're assuming the choice is a version of what we've had ourselves versus what Painter has done... of course, give me Painter and his results. But that isn't the choice. Since RMK... here are program results/models I'd choose over Painter and Purdue... Coach K Duke, Tubby Kentucky, Calipari Kentucky, Calhoun UConn, Williams UNC, Self Kansas, Izzo MSU, Wright Villanova, Hurley UConn... Maybe even Golden Florida, but he's pretty early on there, so we'll see.
I get the pessimism...believe me I do. I've been posting actively on IU boards since RMK was fired, so I've lived through it all. An actual good coach, that's a good fit, changes the narrative. IU has chosen poorly since RMK. At some point they will have chosen wisely. There's no reason, at all, when they do, that the results won't emulate the list of coaches and schools I listed...which is a hell of a lot better than... ZERO nattys, 1 final four, 5 B10 titles...in over 20 years.
And to bring Edey back in to this convo... take him away... Since RMK... Purdue's accomplishments...
25 Seasons
3 B10 titles
0 Final Fours
0 National Championships
Yeah, lets rush to sign up for THAT.
@iunorth wasn’t Purdue just in the final 4? They are the favorites to win it all this yr Time will tell
I appreciate IUNorth soothing my concerns about PU.
@ge-off E D. And yes, they are one of the favorites this year. My prediction though, they get their November Natty, they spend a lot of the season up, or at, number 1, they lose either in Round of 32 or Sweet 16 to a team filled with fast, athletic, physical players.
@iunorth wasn’t Purdue just in the final 4? They are the favorites to win it all this yr Time will tell
some posters seem to think that IU can easily be a program better than what PU has been. I really don’t get it. PU has won everything there is to win short of a national championship. Even if you think the Edey teams were an outlier, pu is still at worst a solid top 15 program.
IU hasn’t won a title since 1987.
Do I think PU will win a title in the next 20 years? Nope. But, I think the odds of PU doing it are vastly higher than IU doing it.
@iunorth I’m with you. They will be good but they seem to let their better athletes (as far as defense) go. This will be the same slower/less athletic type team we see from Purdue. Will be very disciplined but will struggle against elite guards.
@d-b-cooper I think we're breaking TJ's forum rules talking about them as much as we have?! They are going to be very good. And all joking and jealousy aside, they will have a team that could hang a banner. They added 2 very good, and very impactful guys in Cluff and Mayer...and basically a 3rd with Jacobsen missing all year last year. Those guys will help make them, probably, the best offensive team in the country. But none of them are going to help them defend the perimeter better. Guys like Smith and Loyer aren't going to miraculously become good perimeter defenders, they'll remain liabilities. Benter isn't known as a good defender, if he starts getting minutes, that isn't really gonna help them guard much. Mayer isn't a very good defender. He's showing that he might be good enough to start and star alongside Smith...that's a scary offensive backcourt, but borderline awful defensive backcourt. They lost Heide and Colvin, their two guys that were longer and versatile enough to guard and rebound with high major wing athletes. Their fans like to talk about Harris and Cox...but the more minutes they end up playing, the less minutes guys like Mayer and Loyer play. Same story with Cluff and Jacobsen, that means less minutes for TKR.
Long winded way of saying...they're gonna be really good. But if I were a Purdue fan, I'd still be worried about getting stops in the NCAA tournament against teams with good, fast, athletic perimeter players. Which is most of them nowadays when you get to that point in the season. Not sure they'll be able to do it well enough to win 6 straight.
I enjoy the general basketball discussion but the praising of Purdue (even if Matt Painter has earned much of it) is borderline profane.
@tjinman1987 Profanity every now and then can be therapeutic. Knowing that the more excited their fans get between now and March, means that much more pain for them when the inevitable happens... also therapeutic.