ummmm.....No. He scored 30 in the first half and 44 for the game. If he was beat to helL, then it sure didn't prevent him from scoring.
EDEY Offered
- Thread starter Boiler Buck
- Start date
ummmm.....No. He scored 30 in the first half and 44 for the game. If he was beat to helL, then it sure didn't prevent him from scoring.
It was like the big guy Virginia put this year. He was essentially an enforcer like in hockey. He caused a lot of problems for Purdue.
"In light of a 2019 Final Four, in which just 16 former top-100 recruits played in Minneapolis, it’s fair to wonder how strong the correlation is between success on the recruiting trail, at least in the eyes of recruiting services who assign star ratings to prospects, and winning."
Analyzing College Basketball’s Relationship Between Recruiting Rankings and Wins
https://watchstadium.com/news/analy...ween-recruiting-rankings-and-wins-04-17-2019/
Analyzing College Basketball’s Relationship Between Recruiting Rankings and Wins
https://watchstadium.com/news/analy...ween-recruiting-rankings-and-wins-04-17-2019/
You made a statement that is full of fallacies, so I figure the burden of proof is on you.
I don't post often, so I don't have "plenty of time" to address this. The fact is I really don't have the time to waste, casting pearls here.
His scoring fell off significantly in the 2nd half. I don't think you thought that through. Try again.
While UK and Duke have not won every title the last 20 years, for 40 of the last 41 years there has been a McDonald's AA or 5* player on every championship team.
I believe most would agree that the best formula for winning in college basketball is to get really good 4 year players (we do that), and add in one or two top 25 players to the team. This is the Villanova/Virginia strategy.
Well duh....of course his scoring's going to fall off in the second half....He scored 30 freakin points in the 1st half! He 'only' scored 14 in the 2nd half, which is nearly his avg for a half. Plus, don't you think KU made a few defensive adjustments. Zo also went crazy from 3 in the 2nd half to take some of the scoring off Glenn.
Just so I'm clear, what you're saying is despite the fact that 16% of the top 100 played in the FF on 4 teams out of 351.
That's an average of 4 per team, while the other 347 teams had an avg of .25 top 100 recruits?
Basketball season must be approaching. Bonefish is complaining about Purdue's talent. Next he'll pick a player to be his whipping boy to blame for any loss.
I notice it's the same on the football board. This year he chose to blame Ben for his miserable life.
I notice it's the same on the football board. This year he chose to blame Ben for his miserable life.
I'm actually very optimistic about the upcoming season. I think P could be really, really good and make a deep tourney run if we find a go to, crunch time scorer.
What I'm debating is the argument that stars and getting top talent doesn't matter. It does. It's proven that it does.
if painter had Duke or Kansas or UK's talent, he'd have several championships by now. Talent gets you to the final 4, a little luck and a lot of coaching wins it. and sometimes coaching can overcome lack of talent, but not on a yearly consistent basis.
Definitely don't agree with several titles, but I do think he probably have 1 with that type of talent.
Opinions are just that opinions it’s cool yet time and time again teams are showing with less they win with more.
This has to be one of the most homer quotes ever. Do you think painter would have the same success at Northwestern as he does at Purdue? Painter's a good coach, but to say there's no difference is beyond ridiculous.
Any NCAA coach could eventually win a NC with Duke, KU or UK talent. That's not even a legit point.
The coach is responsible for bringing in the talent. When coach K leaves, I suspect Duke will have a major drop off in the talent they bring in.
I would argue that Coach K would have that success anywhere. What does Duke have going for it as a program other than Coach K?
They play in a high school gym, compete with a major power 10 miles away, are a small, academically challenging school, etc, etc. It makes it all that more impressive what Coach K has done.
Don’t forget the loads of money K has had to spend on recruits. That had to help.
I haven't looked it up but I would bet that Purdue has a significantly higher athletic dept budget and basketball recruiting budget than Duke. Unless you're being funny and saying Duke pays players which I highly doubt.
Goodness gracious, I'm going to agree with Lenny a second time in the same offseason.
Although Duke had some success before Krzyzewski, it was nowhere near what he's done....analogous to John Wooden @ UCLA. He did change his recruiting strategy a little over the years to adapt, and Duke also has access to more resources today (built on success) than one would think for a private institution with high academic standards. And though I loathe the over-the-top adoration like Dukie V, etc., I have to give credit where credit is due - it's impressive what he's done there the last 30+ years.
North Carolina, Kentucky, and Kansas have sustained success through various coaches....not sure if Duke can from just an institutional standpoint.....but if they make the right hire.....who knows......we shall see.
With Duke being a private institution, it's tougher to get public information - Ibodel may be able to fill in some gaps. From 2018 Forbes article:
Mike Krzyzewski's Duke Blue Devils reported the highest expense total of any NCAA men's basketball program last year ($19.5 million), but the program also reported nearly $34.4 million in revenue. (Photo by Streeter Lecka/Getty Images)
Not your Granddaddy's Duke.....
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidc...k-among-its-biggest-winners-too/#343918df7a22
Let me help those who would rather just polute this forum and not look at any facts:
"At the other end of the spending spectrum was Duke, the ACC powerhouse with the nation’s biggest basketball budget — $19,507,686 — and a price tag of $696,703.07 per win".
.
"At the other end of the spending spectrum was Duke, the ACC powerhouse with the nation’s biggest basketball budget — $19,507,686 — and a price tag of $696,703.07 per win".
Once again you have your head up your armpit, and show it on this forum.
.
Thus, why I said I hadn't looked it up. But thank you for correcting me. I'm actually pretty surprised at this but I guess the Duke administration is smart enough to know where it's bread is buttered.
I do think that money invested in a sports program is one of the important parts of building a winning program. That is why we must keep pressure on Purdue’s administration to adequately fund our basketball program.
Part of the reason I posed the question about Coach K at Northwestern is there are many other factors that are in play at Northwestern that are not in play at other schools. Many very successful coaches have changed schools and not come close to the success they previously enjoyed at their former school. Bobby Knight is one example. Alford ? Zo is another. Larry Brown is another. part of Coach k's success is his recruiting ability. Another part of his success is the amount of money Duke spends. Coach k has a good thing going at Duke. I'm not so sure he'd be as successful if his budget was slashed, and if he coached at a school that likes academics more than athletics. Or at a school with higher academic entrance requirements.
Purdue has that stupid rule of having all incoming freshmen having 4 years of high school math. We've actually lost a couple of recruits because of that requirement. this is not to say they were dumb. the y just didn't feel the need to take 4 years of math.
there was also a recent thread about school victories etc. I was surprised at the success Duke enjoyed before Coach k arrived. he has not their first successful coach. He stepped into a program that was already successful and took it up to another level. North Carolina and Kentucky have always enjoyed success no matter who the coach is. I've visited both campuses, and they're nice locations and nice communities.
Purdue has that stupid rule of having all incoming freshmen having 4 years of high school math. We've actually lost a couple of recruits because of that requirement. this is not to say they were dumb. the y just didn't feel the need to take 4 years of math.
there was also a recent thread about school victories etc. I was surprised at the success Duke enjoyed before Coach k arrived. he has not their first successful coach. He stepped into a program that was already successful and took it up to another level. North Carolina and Kentucky have always enjoyed success no matter who the coach is. I've visited both campuses, and they're nice locations and nice communities.
I agree that Duke would continue to draw talent. Blue bloods will continue to draw talent until they show a reason why they shouldn't. Look at former blue blood, IU. Four different coaches after RMK and they continue to draw top talent. None of these coaches were considered to be great recruiters when they arrived, so it obviously isn't just the coach. The same can be said for Louisville.Goodness gracious, I'm going to agree with Lenny a second time in the same offseason.
Although Duke had some success before Krzyzewski, it was nowhere near what he's done....analogous to John Wooden @ UCLA. He did change his recruiting strategy a little over the years to adapt, and Duke also has access to more resources today (built on success) than one would think for a private institution with high academic standards. And though I loathe the over-the-top adoration like Dukie V, etc., I have to give credit where credit is due - it's impressive what he's done there the last 30+ years.
North Carolina, Kentucky, and Kansas have sustained success through various coaches....not sure if Duke can from just an institutional standpoint.....but if they make the right hire.....who knows......we shall see.
With Duke being a private institution, it's tougher to get public information - Ibodel may be able to fill in some gaps. From 2018 Forbes article:
Mike Krzyzewski's Duke Blue Devils reported the highest expense total of any NCAA men's basketball program last year ($19.5 million), but the program also reported nearly $34.4 million in revenue. (Photo by Streeter Lecka/Getty Images)
Not your Granddaddy's Duke.....
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidc...k-among-its-biggest-winners-too/#343918df7a22
What REALLY beat him to hell was his teammate-wrestling opponent back at the hotel, later that night.
Correct. Word on the street is whoever it was had a little more fight in him than the dog Thought.
I didn't realize how bug this guy is. He is bigger than Haas. Hope he decides to become a Boiler. I am temporarily in Minnesota and I can tell you it is much too cold in Minnesota to go there!
The weakest 20 coaches for the NCAA's Div. I 350 teams couldn't win a title if you gave them 500 years. We're talking about having Duke, KU, or UK talent 365 days a year, right ?
We'll give you until the sun eventually flames out in 2 1/2 BILLION years, and you're not going to win anything.
Now if we could just Stop missing on the highly rated guys maybe we will get to a final 4. Unfortunately painter will not lie to those guys So I don't ever see Purdue getting them. I'm to the point tell them whatever they wanna hear The other coaches lie And it works for them
Come on man. You have no idea what other coaches say during the recruiting process. Have you ever once heard a recruit or transfer say a coach lied to them.
Coaches need to do what they need to do to land the top recruits. That doesn't mean flat out lie, but you have to play the game.
