ADVERTISEMENT

Would Have Rather Lost CS to Cuonzo

Lionheart1

Junior
Jun 15, 2005
2,177
1,278
113
but this can't be a surprise to anyone. Have Purdue's so called connections in Fort Wayne (Barnes or Parker) delivered on any players to Purdue in the past? Purdue's recent ncaa tourney record vs MSU is no contest. izzo has done well in recent years developing slower less athletic big players. So even though there was late speculation about Purdue and Cal msu seemed the logical choice and from CS perspective it makes sense. And I can't imagine if CS talked to B. Scott Purdue got any help there either. The talk that CS didn't want to play the 5; I'm pretty sure izzo would tell him whatever he wanted to hear.
 
Originally posted by Lionheart1:
but this can't be a surprise to anyone. Have Purdue's so called connections in Fort Wayne (Barnes or Parker) delivered on any players to Purdue in the past? Purdue's recent ncaa tourney record vs MSU is no contest. izzo has done well in recent years developing slower less athletic big players. So even though there was late speculation about Purdue and Cal msu seemed the logical choice and from CS perspective it makes sense. And I can't imagine if CS talked to B. Scott Purdue got any help there either. The talk that CS didn't want to play the 5; I'm pretty sure izzo would tell him whatever he wanted to hear.
Swanigan has "Handler'$"....'nuff said.

I'm glad Matt doesn't have to deal with that and the demands that usually go along with this situation. Slickizzo can have him.
 
Don't disagree with the "handlers" perspective. Would rather not have that baggage hanging around the program.
 
Originally posted by Lionheart1:

The talk that CS didn't want to play the 5; I'm pretty sure izzo would tell him whatever he wanted to hear.
But didn't Costello and Schilling play the 5 for MSU this past season?? They are both coming back.

Two "5s" that aren't big scorers, and can do all the dirty work; bump, reb, foul, etc, while CS shines as the star at the 4.

That's what he wanted.

AJH/Haas would have been fine playing w him too, just saying I don't think he has to be the 5 at MSU either.
 
Clean, it also doesn't add up that Izzo already has a 5 star PF coming in next year. The thing is all our conference foes probably have starting 5 dilemmas right now. Next season has already started in reloading rosters. And our greatest need isn't at PF anyway. If AJ stays we are one experienced PG type away from a huge year. That's obviously our biggest concern.
 
Originally posted by Lionheart1:

The talk that CS didn't want to play the 5; I'm pretty sure izzo would tell him whatever he wanted to hear.
Lionheart, that statement harkens me back to the Dawson recruitment. Dawson stated he really wanted to play the 3 because that is where he projected at the next level. And Slickizzo promised him that would be the case. He did not have that assurance at Purdue as Painter likes to play an athletic 4 - which Dawson fit the bill.

To Slickizzo's credit, Dawson did start alot at the 3 in the beginning of his MSU career. However, it quickly morphed to him playing the 4. And he was a heck of a 4 his senior year!

Promise kept? How quickly we forget.
 
Re: Great rationalization for losing...

IMHO. Painter needs to get off his a$$ and figure out how to win some of these recruiting battles or move to the MAC or back to the MV where he can compete on a lower level at a lower salary. Best case would be he catches lightning like the guy at Wichita St. and can then get paid around what he is making now at Purdue. BTW Dakich made reference last week to the "handlers" of the Ft. Wayne b-ball players saying "he didn't understand what was going on up there". This was before the CS announcement.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT