We All Love Ed.....but

[X-ceptional]

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...

[mirabilelectu]

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.

[GoMuskies]

This thread escalated quickly. LOL

[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.

[AviatorX]

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.

[markchal]

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.

[mirabilelectu]

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.

[Caf]

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.

[GoMuskies]

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

[markchal]

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.