I feel like you are outlining why it makes sense to do it this way. You are talking about being creative and different combinations, but how do we judge what combination is okay? There aren’t distinct positions with different jobs in basketball like there are in football or baseball.
What if I think TJD is a center and Voter 22 thinks he’s a power forward? What if I like playing two bigs and someone else doesn’t. So are three point guards okay but not three bigs? Are all wings okay?
There’s no set lineup of positions for a basketball team. I know All-Pro for the NBA is by position (and has huge salary implications) and that leads to some issues. Is Draymond Green a center if that’s what he plays in crunch time or is he a power forward because he’s 6-foot-6?
Not to mention that everyone is going to vote for their hypothetical teams and then the results will be tallied up and still won’t make any sense.
The only way to do it by position is to have five strict positions and make every team specify what position their players are. That is going to make the All-Big Ten team worse not better.
It isn’t about drafting a team that you think would be really good based on positional fit, not that that wouldn’t be interesting but it is just a different exercise.
I agree about maybe lacking upside at the top, but I also think you have to go pretty far down the list to get to really bad teams. I think the 7-10 range of preseason standings will be going into this year thinking they can make the NCAA Tournament.
I want to agree but Michigan State being voted the consensus 4th best team in the conference preseason leads me to believe differently. That roster is so so so low on talent. If that’s really one of the B1G’s best…yikes.
I think we’re much closer to being last year’s ACC - where they were on the verge of 3-4 bids max all season, except they had obvious underachieving elite talent teams in Duke/UNC which this year’s Big Ten will have none of.
I think you are better off looking at why MSU would be voted high (Izzo) instead of just assuming that it is right and using that to evaluate the other teams.
I’ll be really curious how Iowa, Rutgers, Ohio State, Maryland and those types of teams do in the non-conference.
If they can steal a few wins, the league could be in really good shape.
any mention of draymond on this forum right now is a changeup over the plate, but I think this was actually one of the best jokes you could’ve come up with. no wasted words, laughed out loud when I saw it, telekinetic seal of approval™
I get IU is the consensus favorite because they bring back significant starters, but shooting is still going to be an issue for them. Unless TJD has added a jump shot, teams know how to defend him and will willingly play off the perimeter to clog the middle.
Purdue just seems to have the right pieces and no shining star. That’s how Painter wins, though. He plugs in guys that fit; Gillis, Furst, Morton.
The only two times in Painter’s career he has won the Big Ten he did so with a consensus first team AA (Caleb Swanigan and Carsen Edwards). Really don’t buy the “this is type of team Painter just wins with” thing. Edey is awesome and could be unstoppable and if he is the best player in the conference then maybe that’s the recipe.
I think Edey will be in All-American conversations (at the very least I’d lock him on B10 First Team) also the fact that they came a couple games short in different years isn’t really meaningful as far as predicting the future. Kind of like using NCAA Tournament results instead of KenPom ranks to predict things.
The sample size of a Big Ten season is much different than the sample size of the NCAA tournament. I’m just saying Painter’s best teams have not been some rag tag group - they’ve had top end talent. This year’s doesn’t. Last year’s did.
If we’re positive Edey can play 28 minutes, then I guess so? I love Edey I’m not trying to bash him. But I see a difference between Edey this upcoming season and what Swanigan was his BPOY season or what Carsen and Ivey were. Edey needs to single-handedly carry this team to the upper tier and idk if his proclivity for fouling / stamina will allow him to do that.
I think Edey can get to at least 55% of minutes (which was what senior year Haas was at) and you have to remember he was at 47% last year. Also his minutes weren’t just impacted by stamina or foul trouble but the presence of someone else who needed to play.
It’s not like he played 45% of minutes last year with Austin Davis playing. Purdue has to make a priority to play Trevion.
He’s not going to play Hunter Dickinson minutes, but he’s going to play more minutes.
The key is what you can get from Morton, Furst, Gilis, Kaufman, Newman. Basically five top-100 guys who have tenure in the program and should be solid. Need one to be better than solid, I think.
The supporting pieces are why I’m most skeptical: Would you take anyone on Purdue’s roster over any of Michigan’s projected starters position for position?
Maybe I’d take Newman/Morton over Kobe but that’s it. I’m certainly not taking Edey over Hunter. I don’t see Michigan as a “favorite” or anything in the conference either, but I see them as better than Purdue across the board, which is why I’m struggling to factor in Purdue in a positive light here at all.
It’s very possible Gillis and Furst are better than any of our 4s. Furst has more pedigree than any of them and Gillis was better than any of them last year. Morton over Kobe is possible, maybe likely. Newman could be better than Jett
The Brandon Newman whose minutes went from 23 as a freshman to 12 as a sophomore while shooting 32% from the floor and 32% from three? Idk what Jett is but that feels like a doomsday scenario if Newman is better.
Purdue had the same sized PG hole that we had after Frankie left and instead of adding Llewellyn or a top 100 recruit, their answer was a Utah G who averaged less than 1 assist per game last year. I just don’t see it.
Newman shot really well his freshman year. He felt like a future Purdue sniper back then so it’s possible he returns to that track. Not saying it’s likely but if he shoots 40% from 3 on volume and plays better defense than Jett then he’s probably better.
I agree PG is the question, I just think there is upside there for Purdue that’s similar to Michigan’s.
Cant believe Edey wasnt unanimous 1st team. Obvious Michigan Bias is going into me asking this question but: is there a bigger swing player in the conference than Llewellyn? If Michigan is gonna be a top 3 team, he probably needs to be a top 4 PG? But he is an Ivy league player that could flop and that could let Michigan slip to…8-9ish? Lower?