We All Love Ed.....but

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drew

What does Goodin have to do to earn this fanbase's respect? I am pretty sure our 2 best wins are with him starting as our PG. Too bad he doesn't make cool dunks like Sumner.

---

OK, the best win that this program has ever had was with Sumner starting at PG against the #1 team in the country and eventual national champions last year. Ed had 19 pts, 9 ast, and 6 reb.

Goodin has definitely earned respect as a player, but this is insane...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by X Factor

I'm not sure we beat Creighton with Ed because Quentin did something Ed has never done in his college career - make 4 three pointers.

That was huge for our PG to be able to knock down open threes. If Goodin can continue to make open threes at a respectable clip, he's going to be so hard to defend. He can already get in the lane whenever he wants. If had finished just 2 or 3 of his drives at Creighton he would've scored 20 points.

Really wish we could finish the year with a healthy Ed and Goodin on the court at the same time for extended minutes.

---

Agree with all of this, X Factor! Look I'm not saying Ed is worse than Q, or that the team is better off without Ed. I am saying that they have different skill sets, and that saying all of these outcomes without Ed would have been the same with him are unfounded (and unknowable). The team has been forced to play differently in his absence, a style which I already stated I believed Ed to be capable of facilitating. Maybe that statement is what people disagree with, thinking that the team is just making more shots that they had been missing with Ed on the floor. IMO there is a lot more ball movement now.

This thread escalated quickly. LOL

When I started this post I never implied Q was better than Ed. That we are better off without Ed. That we would have lost at Creighton if Ed had been at the point.
My point was that now that we see more clearly Q's ability, it would have been wonderful if Mack could have found a way to develop Q so he could have been the point guard and Ed the two
If any one is saying that if Ed returned tomorrow in good health you would put him back at the point and sit Q, I would be surprised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GOX

When I started this post I never implied Q was better than Ed. That we are better off without Ed. That we would have lost at Creighton if Ed had been at the point.
My point was that now that we see more clearly Q's ability, it would have been wonderful if Mack could have found a way to develop Q so he could have been the point guard and Ed the two
If any one is saying that if Ed returned tomorrow in good health you would put him back at the point and sit Q, I would be surprised.

---

Totally fair. I'd want both of them playing together as much as possible. I think Mack had pinpointed that in the SJU game before Ed went down.

Edit: To be clear, if forced to choose between the two I'd want Ed 100/100 times. But I also wouldn't want to sit Q.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GOX

If any one is saying that if Ed returned tomorrow in good health you would put him back at the point and sit Q, I would be surprised.

---

The only logical rationalization for this comment would be that the user is somehow related to Q.

He's been playing well for a freshman, but let's not get crazy here. Ed is a game-changer, a monster in transition, and (when healthy, remember he hasn't been fully healthy for awhile) a top NBA prospect. I get that he might not have lived up to some expectations this season, but he's a tremendous player and that cannot be forgotten just because the team as a whole is playing harder. If you gave Ed the games we had from Kaiser and Tyrique, he'd beat most teams in this league too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markchal

The only logical rationalization for this comment would be that the user is somehow related to Q.

He's been playing well for a freshman, but let's not get crazy here. Ed is a game-changer, a monster in transition, and (when healthy, remember he hasn't been fully healthy for awhile) a top NBA prospect. I get that he might not have lived up to some expectations this season, but he's a tremendous player and that cannot be forgotten just because the team as a whole is playing harder. If you gave Ed the games we had from Kaiser and Tyrique, he'd beat most teams in this league too.

---

I think what I'm (and a few others) are trying to say is that it's possible they had good games because they had to retool (maybe, recommit to different areas of) the offense in the absence of Ed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GOX

If any one is saying that if Ed returned tomorrow in good health you would put him back at the point and sit Q, I would be surprised.

---

Well color you surprised.

Who would you sit if Ed was healthy so that Q starts? Bernard? I could get behind that, I guess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mirabilelectu

I think what I'm (and a few others) are trying to say is that it's possible they had good games because they had to retool (maybe, recommit to different areas of) the offense in the absence of Ed.

---

There are much better ways to communicate this point. I do think we've seen more effort out of some guys because they know they need to step up more (for example, the Gates rebounding). And I've been very pleased with Q and with the grit this team has shown in the last few wins (even if they haven't been pretty). But I think the matchups in these games and the corresponding lift in effort from guys trying to pick up the slack are the biggest reasons for the Ws, and not that our offense simply is better without Ed.

I think when we had Ed the rest of the team relied on Ed/Tre/JP to do almost everything. Ed going down forces everyone else to step up and contribute. Q has done some good things and definitely played better than I expected but one of the best ever freshman at X? Come on man.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoMuskies

Who would you sit if Ed was healthy so that Q starts? Bernard? I could get behind that, I guess.

---

JP... I have been clamoring for JP the 6th man all year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drew

I think as a fanbase we have a tendency to anoint "superstars" far too often. The fact is, Sumner is more potential than anything at this point. He is too light, he doesn't have a great shot and his basketball IQ isn't that great. Now he may make a great NBA player because he can improve his weaknesses and he has god-given athleticis, but he isn't a "superstar" at the CBB level.

Goodin on the other hand has to be one of the best freshman we have ever seen. But because Sumner is the "superstar" some of us refuse to acknowledge it.

Give me Goodin over Sumner straight up. Sumner might be the better NBA player someday, but he has tons of flaws currently.

---

There's like 6 bad points in here

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by markchal

There are much better ways to communicate this point. I do think we've seen more effort out of some guys because they know they need to step up more (for example, the Gates rebounding). And I've been very pleased with Q and with the grit this team has shown in the last few wins (even if they haven't been pretty). But I think the matchups in these games and the corresponding lift in effort from guys trying to pick up the slack are the biggest reasons for the Ws, and not that our offense simply is better without Ed.

---

Fair enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GOX

If any one is saying that if Ed returned tomorrow in good health you would put him back at the point and sit Q, I would be surprised.

---

I would put Ed at point and sit Q.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xavier;578106[B

]I think when we had Ed the rest of the team relied on Ed/Tre/JP to do almost everything. Ed going down forces everyone else to step up and contribute.[/B] Q has done some good things and definitely played better than I expected but one of the best ever freshman at X? Come on man.

---

Agreed, but my point would go further in that the coaching staff was content to let those three attempt to carry it. I don't see it as a coincidence that our bigs are showing promise (I know TJ's effort is outrageous, but we at least committed to getting him the ball) and that our guys are hitting more shots. I think the offense looks different now (some people don't), I attribute that fact to Ed's absence (some people don't), but I'm saying the offense was purposefully oriented differently with Ed in the line-up and it wasn't as effective as I thought it would be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SemajParlor

I would put Ed at point and sit Q.

---

I'd leave q at point and put ed at the 2. That's our best lineup in my opinion, or you can switch the two of you really want. I think both on the floor gives the team the best look.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SemajParlor

There's like 6 bad points in here

---

What are they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mirabilelectu

Agreed, but my point would go further in that the coaching staff was content to let those three attempt to carry it. I don't see it as a coincidence that our bigs are showing promise (I know TJ's effort is outrageous, but we at least committed to getting him the ball) and that our guys are hitting more shots. I think the offense looks different now (some people don't), I attribute that fact to Ed's absence (some people don't), but I'm saying the offense was purposefully oriented differently with Ed in the line-up and it wasn't as effective as I thought it would be.

---

This is one of the bigger things I noticed against Creighton. Tyrique was playing great and getting good position, but more importantly the wings were actually passing the ball in. I know the bigs haven't always played great, but I cannot remember another season where I've seen a team struggle so bad at entering the ball into the post. Also funny that they start doing that, and when we actually convert.. the shots from the outside start to get a little more open and the percentages go up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mirabilelectu

Points are all well taken. I guess we just personally disagree with the frequency of open looks; I remember so many shots taken at the end of the shot-clock because we seemed to be passing aimlessly. Also, the Creighton match-up was terrible for our offense at home (67 points with Ed!), so it might be a little dismissive to say that we just match up well with them. In all, it is too early to say that Q's presence has the effect of a better offense, and I agree that I think we will struggle more as teams game-plan for it. But we aren't running different plays, we are just committed to getting the ball in the middle.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GoMuskies

We shot 20% from three against them at Cintas and 45.5% from three in Omaha.

---

Go answered for me the big difference between the two games, besides what I already said about Tyrique having a ridiculously good game. They shot the three well below their season average in the first game and well above their season average in the second game. That's a big point differential from that alone before even accounting for how a team making threes makes other looks easier as the defense spreads out more.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xufan2434

This is one of the bigger things I noticed against Creighton. Tyrique was playing great and getting good position, but more importantly the wings were actually passing the ball in. I know the bigs haven't always played great, but I cannot remember another season where I've seen a team struggle so bad at entering the ball into the post. Also funny that they start doing that, and when we actually convert.. the shots from the outside start to get a little more open and the percentages go up.

---

I agree about passing into the post being a problem this year. I do suspect that Xavier was also trying to force foul trouble on Patton in the early game with repeated attacks as an explicit gameplan, but it did seem like Tyrique's teammates were also excited to get him the ball again.

Sent from my SM-N920V using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ammtd34

Jesus.

---

Ha, my thoughts exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by xufan2434

In what world are you living in calling Goodin one of the best freshmen we've ever seen? Lmao, he's averaging 4, 2, & 1 on the year. I don't care who was in front of him to start the year, if you're throwing that title on him, then he finds his way onto the court regardless. Q has been great compared to what we expected as of late. I think he can become very good, but to say he's better than Ed right now is absurd. He hasn't been asked to do nearly the same things Ed has had to do. Q has played some good defense as of late, but you're also underestimating Ed on that side of the court. He's saved them many a times on defensive boards and steals. Not to mention his ability in the open court. BTW, we're not the only ones anointing Ed.. take a look at every single national media member that covers the sport for a living

---

Yeah the XU fans arent annointing Ed a superstar. We arent the ones naming him a likely 1st round pick (before injury).

GEEZ

Some of Q's passes really make me think he could be one of the most special point guards in Xavier history. In the past we have had great point guards but they just seemed to be scorers first (Tu, Chalmers). Dee Davis was probably a pass first point guard but Q just has a whole different physique and what seems to be a so much higher ceiling.

God Bless Quentin Goodin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by X-ceptional

OK, the best win that this program has ever had was with Sumner starting at PG against the #1 team in the country and eventual national champions last year. Ed had 19 pts, 9 ast, and 6 reb.

Goodin has definitely earned respect as a player, but this is insane...

---

Pssssh...

Let's look at where Q's numbers are trending after two starts...

8 points vs. Seton Hall & 15 points vs. Creighton (increase of 87.5%)
1 steal vs. Seton Hall & 5 steals vs. Creighton (increase of 400%)

Assume we win out and go all the way (and you'll soon see why)... we would play 17 more games... all Q has to do is keep his current growth trends, and by my calculations, he will score 656,316 points and get 85,899,345,920 steals in the National Championship game.

Given the way Q has played over 2 starts, I think we can all agree these numbers are very attainable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AviatorX

This may be the most I've ever disagreed with a post on here. I actually think X fans (and fans in general) underappreciate how good players are at times when they are on "our" team -- see some of the thoughts on Tre on this board or the parade of critiques whenever a player is so much as rumored to be considering leaving early.

---

Word.

We literally had people arguing Trevon wasnt good enough to play in the BE one year AFTER he was 1st team All BE!!! HAHAHAHA X fans are too good sometimes!

Cant wait for that beer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Drew

What does Goodin have to do to earn this fanbase's respect? I am pretty sure our 2 best wins are with him starting as our PG. Too bad he doesn't make cool dunks like Sumner.

---

He has our respect. Deosnt mean hes better than Sumner.

I love what Q's doing and how he has stepped up. He isnt better than Sumner. Not even close.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by X Factor

What are they?

---

I don't feel the need to continue to knock on a poster and fellow X fan that I've never encountered on here. But yeah, I see at least 6.

After 2 surgeries, what are the chances he even comes back next year? Acl's don't heal up in 7-9 months, do they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue Blooded-05

Pssssh...

Let's look at where Q's numbers are trending after two starts...

8 points vs. Seton Hall & 15 points vs. Creighton (increase of 87.5%)
1 steal vs. Seton Hall & 5 steals vs. Creighton (increase of 400%)

Assume we win out and go all the way (and you'll soon see why)... we would play 17 more games... all Q has to do is keep his current growth trends, and by my calculations, he will score 656,316 points and get 85,899,345,920 steals in the National Championship game.

Given the way Q has played over 2 starts, I think we can all agree these numbers are very attainable.

---

Math checks out. Although I have to say, I would be a little disappointed with that scoring total. He should be able to convert those nearly 86 billion steals into at least a few more buckets I would hope.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bobbiemcgee

After 2 surgeries, what are the chances he even comes back next year? Acl's don't heal up in 7-9 months, do they?

---

Yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by X-ceptional

OK, the best win that this program has ever had was with Sumner starting at PG against the #1 team in the country and eventual national champions last year. Ed had 19 pts, 9 ast, and 6 reb.

---

Not to derail this thread, and the win over Nova was very, very good.
But I'm not sure that is necessarily the best win this program has "ever" had.

My vote goes for our win over #1UC, on their home court. Thank you Lenny Brown.

Ever? Texas or WV in the respective Sweet 16s, duh. Would also accept Georgetown 1990.

I'll take the win over Texas to get to the Elite Eight.

My starting five if everyone was healthy and available: Q, Ed, Tre, Gates, Tyrique.

I love JP as the sixth man. Team's might think "Ah, their starting five is going out now we can let up a little bit. Crap, it's that pesky sonuva..."

The early effort we've seen from Gates starting at the UC game really seems to translate to him "locking in" in terms of effort and focus.

And I think Mack has been masterful at managing the bigs the past three games.

In general, I've liked the look of the offense the past couple of games. There's more movement, they're looking to the interior more often, etc.

Ed is undoubtedly better than Q, but I'm partial to seeing the entire team involved instead of waiting for Ed or Tre to make a play...or for JP to try to go get his.

Ed finishes better at the rim and is a better foul shooter.Q so far is showing himself to be a better 3 point shooter.I think we are fortunate to have 2 guys who can play the point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lloyd Braun

JP... I have been clamoring for JP the 6th man all year.

---

Agree... still give him the same minutes... but JP plays harder and smarter when he comes off the bench. He comes out with a little more oomph... more tenacity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IM4X

Agree... still give him the same minutes... but JP plays harder and smarter when he comes off the bench. He comes out with a little more oomph... more tenacity.

---

I think JP plays hard no matter what. I haven't seen any difference with him starting this year as opposed to him coming off the bench last year. He still dives all over the floor, flies out of bounds going after loose balls, etc.

Why on earth would you NOT start JP??? That's almost as ridiculous as not starting Edmond.

Definitely bring Malcom off the bench as a sixth man. But, all of this is moot anyway since Ed is finished for the year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by muskieindent

Ed finishes better at the rim and is a better foul shooter.Q so far is showing himself to be a better 3 point shooter.I think we are fortunate to have 2 guys who can play the point.

---

I wouldn't expect that good 3 point shooting to last. I'd be very happy with 32% from him going forward. Pretty sure he shot something like 24% his senior year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paulxu

Not to derail this thread, and the win over Nova was very, very good.
But I'm not sure that is necessarily the best win this program has "ever" had.

My vote goes for our win over #1UC, on their home court. Thank you Lenny Brown.

---

I'm not too worried about derailing this thread, and I definitely see where you're coming from. I don't necessarily think that the win over Nova was the "biggest" win in X history. I think the S16 victories are bigger in that regard. It may be a matter of recency bias, but considering how good Nova was coming into it, and then also looking at it in retrospect (i.e., I am also taking into consideration Nova went on to win it all), I just feel as though it was the best win, even if it's not the biggest or most important... if that makes sense. But, certainly reasonable minds can and will differ on this.