ADVERTISEMENT

Edwards to NBA

I agree that I think PG was the scapegoat of the year.

If you look at our losses, there are typically multiple red flags.

vs. Michigan for example...

Vince Edwards went 1-9. AJ was only 4-11 and only had 4 rebounds. We were out rebounded that game for the first time in the season - to a team that's not that great of a rebounding team. We only had 9 turnovers. We shot 50% from 3.

Obviously a big red flag from that game was that we were out rebounded by an average rebounding team and was the first time we had been out rebounded. That's probably the culprit in this game - if we had an average rebounding game by our standards, we win.

vs. Iowa in Iowa City...

Our PG, PJ, was our second leading scorer with 16 points (providing offense). However, AJ only had 3 made baskets in the entire game. And Hammons, Haas and Swanigan combined to have 5 made baskets in the entire game! That's certainly not a recipe for success for us. Our free throw percentage that game was also 53%.

So again, if our big guys were more efficient/involved, would we have lost? Probably not. We weren't in sync offensively - and not just because of guard play.


Yes, would it have been great to have an amazing PG, but it doesn't just solve all problems. Look at Providence - they had one of the best in the country and didn't make much noise come tournament time. Every team has strengths and weaknesses. And almost every team out there has a SIGNIFICANT one otherwise we wouldn't see as much parody as you do. Our biggest strength was our inside game - yet in multiple losses our inside game was MIA. You can't discount that.


the bigs had bad games because they were the focus of the opponents d. if the lane is clogged withs big bodies it is hard to score, that's because the guards were zero threat to score unless they had to. there was a couple games that the guards were decent but not for the season
 
the bigs had bad games because they were the focus of the opponents d. if the lane is clogged withs big bodies it is hard to score, that's because the guards were zero threat to score unless they had to. there was a couple games that the guards were decent but not for the season
I disagree that the guards were zero threat to score. Mathias and Cline were a big threat to score which is why help rarely came from the players guarding them. PJ and Vince shot over 40% from three for the year and improved as the season went on.

Especially late in the season, teams tended to leave Davis and Hill open a lot, but overall the team shot quite well from outside. (It is unfortunate that Davis struggled with his offense down the stretch, but I don't think he ever really returned to form after missing a few games in December.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schnelk
Jerry Sichting - graduated from Martinsville, played at Purdue from 1975-1979, and then had a 10-year NBA career with several teams.
Thanks for giving the correct spelling of his name.

I recall watching a Purdue game when I was quite young, and John Wooden was doing the color commentary. Jerry had the ball at the end of the game and the opponents were trying to foul him. He kept weaving and juking, with the ball, and they couldn't catch him to foul him. Wooden was laughing and said, "You couldn't guard him with a machine gun!" That quote stuck in my mind.

:cool:
 
I disagree that the guards were zero threat to score. Mathias and Cline were a big threat to score which is why help rarely came from the players guarding them. PJ and Vince shot over 40% from three for the year and improved as the season went on.

Especially late in the season, teams tended to leave Davis and Hill open a lot, but overall the team shot quite well from outside. (It is unfortunate that Davis struggled with his offense down the stretch, but I don't think he ever really returned to form after missing a few games in December.)


i stand corrected three players in particular did cause a problem in the lane being clogged. you know it was 2 point guards and davis
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT