Where does Trayce Jackson-Davis end up?
- Thread starter birdforbogey
- Start date
No you're a troll for your post history and you don't really seem to understand the things you post about.
We win the conference more than we finish in the basement so your outlier argument doesn't fit your own argument. Maybe you should google that term so you can get a better understanding of what it means.
Either way, I'm not going to waste more time on you so you can have the last word. There just is no basis in fact for the things you posted about no matter which way you try and spin it. Sorry.
I was only including data since 2010. If you want to include everything under CMP, then yes Purdue has won the conference 2 times and finished last 1 time. If you are happy with CMP's recruiting history, then I'm glad for you. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. If you don't want to see my posts anymore I would suggest using the "Ignore" button. If you use it enough you will only see posts from people who think exactly like you do.
Get where these rankings play into everyone's expectations but in 2015 OSU basketball had the 1 class in the Big Ten and 5th nationally - where are they now?
2011 Nebraska had the 1 class in the Big Ten - remind me how many titles they have won?
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe everyone from the OSU #1 class transferred. Recruiting rankings aren't gospel, but for the most part they give a good indication of how a recruit will be. For example, we won the Big Ten last year and had a 5* All -American on the team. Do we win the championship without him? No.
Yes, pretty sure OSU lost that entire class. And I think we can agree on the objectiveness of rankings as that is point in time and nothing is ever changes if they flop.
I don't know if we win last year without Caleb - probably not. On the other hand, MSU had how many 5 stars and there 3rd best class in the country and they were 7th in the conference. Again, just objective numbers.
Do I wish Painter would get consistent top 3 BTN classes each year? Yes
I think we can revisit this topic next year after our performance in 17-18 and with the class Painter is able to put together with Lutz on staff.
I agree with this. I will point out though that MSU's top 3 class in the nation set them up to be pre-ranked top 5 this year and #1 in the conference. Not saying they will finish that way, but they should be very good this year.
LOL, but you realize that the rankings are tied to the class size as well right?
If you bring in the ONE perfect piece top fill out a roster, they "numbers" say that is #13.
So do you really think Purdue's 2016 class was second to last?
I can tell you for a fact that with Biggie and the juniors coming back I would rank the 2016 class MUCH higher than that.
We only had ONE in that class . We did not NEED a big class. And the one in that class? CARSEN EDWARDS! The perfect fit to that class.
I would take that class in that situation every time
Of course I realize that. Having a one man class is generally not a good thing. Especially when the class before it ends up being a one man class (Biggie left early leaving Cline as the only recruit). Those two classes, while great for last year, created roster imbalance. That's why we we took a bunch of question marks in 2017. If those question marks work out then fantastic. If those question marks don't work out then Purdue is SCREWED. We still have 4 scholarships to give in 2018. Based on the current recruiting landscape we will be filling those spots with more question marks as well. You can argue all you want that Haarms, Wheeler, Sasha, Ewing, and Williams will all be good, but until they prove it on the court they are question marks. Biggie, Carsen, Eastern were all players that should be able to plug and play right away (Although it still remains to be seen if Eastern will be a PG or Wing IMO). Can you genuinely say you aren't concerned about losing PJ, Mathias, Vince, and Haas while only gaining Williams (For now)???????
Odds are that 4 years ago you would have called Mathis, Edwards, PJ, and Haas "question marks", right? Until they play a game any class is full of "question marks". You know that sort of replacement of senior players happens every years, right? I am just having a hard time understanding why you think we are "screwed" (leaving the capital letters to your post only). It is the nature of college basketball, and nothing to get alarmed about... unless this is an attempt at trolling?
That was a Crean problem at least in terms of perception as it seemed that many of his instate recruits didn't stick for many different reasons.
Without a doubt next season could be a little rough... or really good. It is a question mark but question marks can go either way.
If we had two top 20's and two top 40's every class we would be Duke or Kentucky, etc..
Losing four senior starters is always a challenge.
And it is for everyone. People put entirely too much weight in to meaningless rankings of classes. All those rankings don't do you any good if you can't produce results.
And CMP has an overall successful record save a couple years. The chart I posted a while back showing his ranking in terms of NCAA appearances proves it.
I should also add that what I mean by a little rough in 18-19 is not the bottom of the big but small dip with a quick recovery.
I get that. I also would have called Lawson, Hale, Weatherford, Scott, and Smotherman question marks. This year's senior class turned out great. We can't count on that every year.
You no the old saying you put your pants on the same way any so call 5Players puts there's on. I been around basketball all my life and so much have changed from the time I played back in the 80s and 90s heck AAU hadn't even hit the ground running yet. Fast forward this new generation of players is different it's not about basketball it's all about there name, rankings and status. You no how many scouting services out here too many and most of these scouts are all dudes who have never played basketball in their life, but yet can give an opinion about a player and many believe what they write. Remember this rankings are an opinion right man made and doesn't mean their opinion of what a player is is right. Think about this Kentucky and Duke had many 5All Americans right did they make it to final 4. Do not be fooled about rankings it's a opinion and a number , but once you get into college none of that means nothing. Ben Simmons did not even make the NCAA tournament. coming into the season many teams will be ranked in the top 25 and predicted to win it all right. Kansas, North Carolina, Duke and Kentucky was predicted to make it to final 4 right but instead South Carolina, gonzaga, NC and Oregon in up going with not many all Americans on the team. You talk about 1 and done. Put it to you like this many one and dones don't make it past the 2nd year of their contract because many really aren't ready for that level but because draft express say so than many think they are. Diamond stone, tyus Jones and many more like them took the money and ran now look at both stone got cut out of a job trus don't even play and probably be out of a job this season. Bottom line because someone say you a all American 5 And ranked high does not mean you will be a pro trust and believe that. Michigan state is predicted to win the big ten and win it all remember they were the #3 team coming into the season with high ranking players and yet they never made it back into the top 25 once they got out of it but yet purdue stay in it all season and finished top 15 when season ended with 1 5 Player that worked hard to get better why he was drafted. My suggestion stop reading all that stuff because most of it is hype I've seen it all been around it all. Pay attention when season starts make sure you watch many kentucky and Duke games as well as Kansas and Louisville many have high rankings players on their team but watch what happens when you see many of them sitting the bench and will not be one and done. Just giving you some knowledge because I went through the process with my son but I no this When season starts you will see exactly what I'm talking about. My son wasn't ranked high or made the all American game but when season gets here you will see just how giood he is. In closing it's not just getting into the league it's staying in the league think about that.
I never questioned your son. I said he should be able to contribute right away. I did question whether or not he will be able to play PG or if he will have to play wing. If he has to play wing I'm sure he will still be good.
I never said you you did I'm just giving some of you knowledge about what I have seen throughout this process since my son was in the 8th grade and he will play PG and he is good at it wait till season starts you will see. He has played PG all his life since 5th grade but he can also play Many other positions as well. You only got a taste of what he can do. He is a basketball player that has a basketball mind that can play and defend 4 positions. That is why painter recruited him because his ability to play multiple positions especially the PG position. He makes the team around him better he gets his teammates involved he is a leader and winner last i check that sounds like a pg to me. In due time you will see. Have a good evening
That is actually the beauty of Painter's system. You want the ball in the hands of your best player. Eastern has already shown as a freshman that he can make incredible decisions and passes. At his size, his understanding of the game is almost unfair. He is a point guard. Painter may have him do other things, but he will be the floor general. Trust him to make the correct decisions with the ball. He can gaurd 1-4 because of his size and athleticism. I can't think of many teams that wouldn't take a player like him, and those that would pass would regret it. If he can get and keep his 3 point % over 40, that would make him one of the scariest players in all of college basketball. It doesn't mean he needs to shoot a lot, but if players have to respect the long ball, everything opens up. Especially when almost all the other players can shoot as well. I can't wait for the season.
I am not as concerned about next year as others. I think depth will be a bit of an issue, but Purdue has a lot of young talent. I think Painter will find pieces that work. The kids who really want to be at Purdue will be there. All he has to do is keep on winning. Four years ago, Painter grabbed a bunch of seniors that have played and developed and shined. Three years ago he signed Mcds all-American and a top recruit in a Biggie. Then he signed Carsen Edwards. Then he signed Eastern and Ewing. This next years class already has Williams. Those are very nice building blocks. Many other higher rated players have been busts.
Purdue has one of the longer current running streaks of being ranked. They have made the tournament 3 straight years, have a sweet 16, and a conference outright championship. There are only a handful of schools that can say that. I hope to see at least another Sweet 16 and a legit shot at the conference championship. There isn't much more that I would want over a win at MSU. This years schedule is loaded with potential amazing games against great opponents. Possibly Nova, Arizona, Butler, and Louisville out of conference. Then headed into a conference wth many pre season top 25s. If Purdue manages to beat at least two of those teams, they will open up a lot of eyes. If thy beat all 4, they will wake up the whole country.
.
You hit so many things in point and as season plays out well all get to see what they either made of or not. I'm very optimistic about this season with what this group of players who all want to do is play for one another and win as a team. The WUG truly brought them closer as a team on and off the court which will help as season goes on. You right about 1 thing my son shot is coming alone and he is definitely working on it to get better and more consistent. If he can hit open shots he will keep defenses on there heels for sure. I'm just looking forward to a fun, exciting and winning season. Boiler up baby.
Agree with your point but wanted to breakdown the list in terms of why they failed (speculative admittedly).
Lawson: I just don't think he understood the game very well and maybe wasn't up to the extreme effort it takes at this level.
That's a simple recruiting miss.
Hale: could have been decent, had the physical tools but seemed to have a lot of southern Indiana baggage. I'm from there and recognize it quickly
. Not a bad guy (nothing awful I can recall) but the coach missed or gambled on a character flaw that cost him.Weatherford: just not good enough. Clear miss.
Scott: this one was unfortunate. Capable hard nosed, hard headed player. I think the hard head got him into a bad decision. He stated himself that he should not have left.
I dont think this was a miss. Just a kid who should have stuck with it.
Smotherman: had all the tools to be a solid or better four year player. Couldn't get past 4:20 every day. That's a character issue.
Of that list, only one lacked the physical ability to be big ten. One wanted to be the man and wasn't patient enough to stick it out. The rest had a flaw that created the end of their major college career.
This is why Painter talks about character as his number one target in a recruit.
If this current group of seniors is indicative of the character of the recruits since their class, then we will be just fine.
There is some good in this post and a lot that isn't truly accurate. Here are a few of your points that I don't believe are accurate.
- Not playing at an elite level (D1/Pro) doesn't mean you can't evaluate talent
- Rankings are opinions, they get right more often than not (at the upper end)
- Rankings are just a piece of the pie, not the whole pie
- Kentucky/Duke get to/win more often than not because talent + coaching
- North Carolina, South Carolina, Gonzaga, and Oregon all had talent
-- UNC (J. Jackson 5*, T. Pinson 5*, J. Berry high 4*, I. Hicks 5*, K. Meeks 4*, N. Britt 4*, K. Williams 4*)
-- USC (S. Thornwell high 4*, P. Dozier 5*)
-- Oregon (D. Brooks 4*, J. Bell 4*, T. Dorsey high 4*, C. Boucher 4*, P. Pritchard 4*)
-- Gonzaga (J. Perkins 4*, Z. Collins high 4*, N. Williams-Goss high 4*, J. Williams 4*)
- Simmons didn't win because of situation + one year stop over to payday
- Kansas, North Carolina, Duke & Kentucky get there more often than others
- Tyus Jones went because his draft stock was as high as it would get
- You're more likely to be in the NBA as an McD's AA than not (stats)
You can break down what you want still doesn't make what you say is accurate either doesn't mean any of them will long term pros. I stand on what I say you entitled to your opinions and I will stand on mine. I did my homework too and you not accurate either. Malik Newman , chase Jeter , Derrick Thornton, Marquese bolden , wain grabiel. 3 players on Kentucky roster right now 2 sophomores and junior were everything you named not 1 and done. Duke 2 on there roster meet all your requirements both sat the bench. The kid from Kansas who transferred to Arizona state meet your requirements didn't play much end up transferring so what you say maybe have a number and status behind it doesn't make them pros. Step curry, Damian lillard, leanord from the spurs suggest that. You put in the work get better choose the right college and play and show up on the big stage your chances is just as good as getting drafted as those you named
He isn't saying that rankings mean everything, but for the most part they are pretty accurate. A high percentage of 5 star recruits turn out to be good at power 5 schools. A lower percentage of 4 stars end up being good, and an even lower percentage of 3 stars end up being good. There are exceptions, like Steph, Damian, and Kawhi, but for the most part NBA (and college) stars were 5* or high 4*. For example, LeBron, KD, AD, Westbrook, CP3, John Wall, Cousins,.... I could go on all day.
Please don't misquote me. I stated that you're more likely to make the NBA as an McD's AA than not. That is a fact. I never stated that you couldn't make the NBA if you're not an McD's AA. There are plenty of examples just over the last few years in the Big Ten. ( DJ Wilson, OG Anunoby, D. Valentine, C. LeVert, AJ Hammons, Jake Layman) There have also been McD's AA to make it from the Big Ten (C. Swanigan, T. Bryant, D. Stone, D. Davis)
There are bust every year in the rankings. It's part of of the rankings system. Just because you're a McD's AA doesn't mean you'll be an OAD. The truly special teams take 5* and high 4* upperclassmen and construct a TEAM to get to Final Fours and win championships.
I'll stand by my statement, and facts, that you're more likely to make it to the NBA if you're an McDonald's All-American.
If I remember correctly, Kwahi was actually ranked as a solid 4* recruit. Part of the rankings (ratings) is predicting a player's potential. Kwahi had a boatload but wasn't polished.
Ok go on still doesn't make what you say either is right. I've been through the recruiting process and I seen many of these kids play in parson and because someone say this is what they are doesn't make them right and it certainly doesn't make what I say is wrong. That is were difference of opinions clash and your opinion is different than mine and I'll say it again status and rankings don't define a player more often than not either I can go on all day
Sheesh, with that attitude I guess the Super Bowl the Colts won a few years back is nullified because they were terrible last year (and probably this year as well).
So I guess IU winning the conference two years ago doesn't matter either since they haven't made it past the sweet 16 of the tourney since 2002. And really with that attitude, Purdue has been abysmal since 1994 and the 5 conference titles they have won since then are cancelled out as well.
Since 1980, Purdue has won 8 conference championships. Indiana has won 10, Michigan State has won 8, Michigan 4, OSU has won 7, Illinois 6, and Wisconsin 4. Of those teams Whisky (last), Ohio State (last), Michigan State, Illinois (last), Purdue (last), Indiana (last) have finished either second to last or last at least once. The only program not to do so in that time frame is Michigan. With your rationalization, throw the baby our with the bath water.
Maybe he was but was he a McDonald all American,gaterade player of the year. I don't no but He still got drafted. Kentucky and Duke got a boat load of everything you say more often than not will be pros or OnD players let's revisit this topic when season ends and let's see how many end up being one n done. Diamond stone was one n done played at Maryland 1st round draft pick got cut and now out of the League. Your points some are valid but many may leave after 1 year but actually may not be ready. It's not just getting in the league it's staying in the league getting that 2nd contract is what you want. After this NBA season we will see of all the kids got drafted specifically your 1 no done all Americans we'll see who plays who don't who will be in the G league. We'll see after 2 years what happens to them then. Only time will tell. My son 4 star player but to me that means nothing to him or me because he knows he must continue to get better to reach his goal. Choosing a school were you can play also helps your chances ,but if you sitting on the bench with the status you name marquese bolden, sacha Killy jones and many more of those players don't go 1 and done because they don't get to play. You step foot on a college court your rankings and status change because this isn't HS anymore.
I'll bite. No it doesn't matter to IU that they won the Big Ten two years ago... Case and point, they fired Crean a year later.... we should have similar expectations.
Ahhh logic and reason. I fear it is wasted however.
I'm not really sure what you're arguing now. Could you state your argument clearly?
Kawhi Leonard was not a McDonald's All-American and I doubt he was a Gatorade POY. There are several examples of "late bloomers" or complete misses by the "men who never played ball." However, for every miss they probably hit on 9. I would take those odds every day of the week.
I never stated that every McDonald's AA would be a one and done nor pros. They are more likely to be OAD and pros. That's a fact and the statistics back that up, not opinion. Rankings prove that those men who spend hours on the road scouting high school players get it right more often than not. They're able to identify the elite talent at the high school level. They do their best to project players but they don't get it right with every player. (How boring would that be?)
Fit is important when projecting how a player will develop. That's a big reason we see misses in the rankings. A player might end up sitting on the bench or not developing at a rate commensurate of his high school ranking. Attitude and drive are a few other factors.
If I'm building a TEAM to win in college give me the 5* or high 4* that has the drive to be the best version of himself, a great teammate, and is willing to stay in school when he gets the appropriate feedback that tells him he's not ready.
There have only been 2 National Championship teams led by freshmen. (Kentucky 2012, Duke 2015) They also had upperclassmen that played vital roles in their success.
There are players that see their stock peak after their first year in college. (Tyus Jones comes to mind) They realize they can get guaranteed money and go pro. They realize they will never get drafted higher with more time in college. They also know they might end up in the G-League. There are other kids (basketball players and in general) that know college isn't for them. They choose to leave college and enter the draft not because they will get drafted but they don't want to stay in college.
I really appreciate your perspective. Very few on here have been through the process like you have, so your thoughts are very valued. I'm excited about your son's prospects at Purdue and beyond, not only because of his obvious skills and abilities, but because he seems to have a healthy and hardworking approach to the game. Those intangibles are often the difference between a kid who accomplishes nothing and a kid who accomplishes a great deal.
Thanks I'm just trying to share what I no ,have seen and have gone through.
Agreed. Unfortunately the world now has a bunch of people who think they are basketball recruiting experts because they can get on the internet and see how many stars a kid has next to his name. They have no idea how those stars are awarded or whether the rating service even saw the kid play. But since it's on the internet, it must be true.
It's appreciated. And I hope this board doesn't give a skewed view of how most Purdue fans feel about the program and Coach Painter. We've had twenty-six and twenty-seven wins, respectively, over the past two years. Last season was an outright Big Ten title and a Sweet Sixteen appearance. And this year's group appears poised to be just as good (and, potentially, better). I know you know all that, but listening to some folks talk, you'd think we've been dwelling in the cellar.
Anyway, we're delighted to have you here. As you've said in other posts, Coach Painter is honest, and that's not always valued by folks who want a shiny new toy. The fact is, he's rock-solid, as is this program. And I believe your son is going to be a substantial part of a rock-solid future.
Way over simplified. Lots of reasons to fire Crean going back the start. Poor positional balance, poor player behavior on and off the court, and generally bad coaching are high on the list. He does less with more.
Sure, but if you exclude his first two seasons when he was mostly playing with Keady's players, Painter has finished top 3 in the Big Ten in 7 of the last 10 seasons. His recruiting looks better based on results than it does based on class rankings. I think that both perspectives are helpful when rating Painter's recruiting. What frustrates fans is that we want the class rankings to reflect Painter's on court success, but I would argue that Purdue as an institution tends to be at a disadvantage compared to schools like IU, Michigan, and OSU and Painter's recruiting at Purdue has been solid considering factors such as brand and budget. I'd also argue that when Painter has targeted players who are good fits for his system and culture, results have exceeded rankings. When he got away from targeting Purdue type players, Purdue had a couple rough seasons.
Similar threads
