Good point. Someone pointed out on the other site that early in the year Ethan was coming off of screens and shooting more on the move and that may have messed with his form and confidence. I don't have any evidence of that but it seems plausible.
Don't we need another Guard?
- Thread starter BoilerUpThenHammerDown
- Start date
Brees was playing Ohio State....Ivey was playing st peters...big difference bruh....
Morton doesn't have good shooting form...he will always struggle with higher volume....spot minutes next year will help his shooting percentages....hopefully Colvin and Heide can fill in most of his minutes next year....I think Morton can be a good press breaker, secondary ball handler, and spot defender....go back to his minutes he played as a sophomore....
Lying is lying. Welcing is welching. But I'm sure that you are justifying in your mind that what you are doing is different.
less teams in tourney those years than now! Different % chances back then, don't you know?
Not a pretty shot but there's no reason he can't shoot 35% from three on the type of open looks that he's had the last two seasons.
Will he be able to actually do that? We'll find out in a couple of months.
Purdue should still be in the Final Four 1 or 2 times every 10 years. The End.
I don't often agree with you but averaging a final four every 10 years is not unrealistic. The Big Ten has had 16 Final Four appearances since 2000 (trailing only the ACC at 18). To expect Purdue to have two (maybe three) of those as one of the top five or six programs in the Big Ten seems perfectly reasonable.
I agree too, but what would be interesting would be to see a list of teams that have 4 or more final fours since 1980 and a list of of P5 teams with fewer than 4 over the same time period. I'm way too lazy to do it, but maybe someone can give it a go.
I'm too lazy to look up the totals since 1980 as well but this article lists the teams with the most all time and I was surprised at the numbers (Arizona with four FF's in program history?). It does show (IMO) that two FF's every ten years is not a realistic expectation for Purdue at this point.Link: Most FF's all time
- 8+ FF appearances all time - nine total schools including IU, MSU and OSU
- 6 appearances - good for a five way tie for 10th most all time (includes Michigan)
- 5 appearances - good for a seven way tie for 17th most all time (includes Illinois)
- 4 appearances - good for a six way tie for 22nd most all time (includes Wisconsin)
Understood and I really do understand the frustration. Having said that it is never, ever, ever going to happen so long as MP is making the tournament consistently and running a clean program.
Did I mention never?
I'm with you though, hoping he can get it done and at this point will be disappointed if he can't. Certainly seems to be in the best position to do so over the next three to five years than has been the case in a long time.
When you hire only for tournament success you get crean, archie Miller, Kevin Ollie, Mike Davis....not a good model to follow....consistent success during the whole year matters more....you're building a program not a flash in the pan....
I understand and agree, but at some point that regular season success has to translate to tournament success or you are doing something wrong doesn’t it?
I know that’s Matt and the team’s goal. They’re talking about winning national championships. I’m not advocating for blowing things up at a time when the program is continuing to improve but it seems that the next few years are do or die time. I don’t think that Matt wants to coach for 30 years if he’s not winning at the highest level.
This isn’t Purdue football where limping into a conference championship game and keeping it close for a half is as good as it’s likely ever going to get. Purdue basketball isn’t an elite program but it’s good enough that expecting a final four occasionally should be realistic. I will enjoy each game of the upcoming season, regardless of how the season ends but I think it’s fair for fans to be disappointed and frustrated if this team doesn’t find a high-level of NCAA tournament success
Last edited:
While you were bragging about contributing, you were asking stupid questions about it that no knowledgeable person would ask.
You made the claim. Prove it.
You're problem is that you're happy with 20 wins and a tourney bid, everything else is gravy. Painter has been "building" the Purdue program for 18 years. Yet, his tourney performance has arguably gotten worse over time in terms of losing to low seeds, including the worst tourney loss in NCAA history (and that's with what some would consider his most talented teams).
So, if you don't believe March matters, then that's fine. But outside of West Lafayette, March is all that matters, and is what the program reputation and perception (from the media, recruits, etc) is built upon.
As I've said previously, why would I share my personal financial dealings on an anonymous message board with a dip$hit like you?
But, since you asked, I may or may not have given the collective $1M anonymously.
It is odd that how dominant we’ve seemingly become during the regular season(back to back #1) has coincided with our string of awful tournament performances.
making 4 out of the last 6 sweet sixteens says otherwise.
Your problem is that you set the ultimate goals for other people like you say you set them for yourself (those were your words). You are projecting your own failings on the team. It clearly frustrates you that you can't associate yourself with college kids winning a National Championship to compensate for your own personal failings.
Meh, we were predicted to be a bubble team and got a 1 seed....I'm happy with last year's team....we knew we had weaknesses so I wasn't expecting much and was pleasantly surprised....the year before was disappointing all around...all that talent and nothing to show for it...but the covid year blew our expectations to crazy heights....we weren't that good the year before...north texas proved that, and with it being a shortened year we had no idea how good we really were....then Jaden blew up over the summer and so did edey.....but we weren't a well constructed team....we couldn't play Trevion and edey together so Edey's role was reduced, Jaden was given too much freedom for a player that was still too raw....hunter never really became the pg we needed and sasha was too inconsistent....still no reason to lose to st peters but we had the capability with the way Jaden played at times....this year seems to be different...we won't know until we see the new guys play but we have the pieces....I think Painter spoils you guys during the season with our overachieving with less talent...this year will be different, we finally have the talent along with experience, depth and cohesiveness....I think you'll see something like you haven't seen from a Purdue team before...even tkr said it in a recent interview...he thinks this year will be special and probably the reason he came back with edey...
We really weren't dominant the previous 2 years...both those teams had serious flaws...I'm hoping this year's team will be the year....we finally have the pieces with depth, athleticism, experience....we just need to find a little more scoring from the new guys and we'll be set....I think this team could be dominant....
It is an interesting conundrum: Are Painters teams built for the grind of the regular season in the B10 but then when they face teams that are constructed with more athletes, faster pace, etc that they can't adjust?
This has been the rub on the B10 for a while. There's apparently some truth to the fact that the B10 is a grind it out, rock fight league, with big, slow, lumbering low post players and where some schools are happy to keep the score in the 60s. Contrast that with watching an ACC game and you see a much different style (for the most part, but not always) with different physical make up and caliber of athlete, with scores in the 80s.
And we're 1-3 in those last 4 S16s.
Losing to a 16, 15 and 12 seed.
The Sweet 16 should not be the pinnacle for Purdue basketball.
That's a very strange word salad, I'm not even sure what you're trying to say.
I think what you're trying to say is that your goal for Purdue basketball is to make the tourney and if that happens, you're happy. Where as I have higher expectations, like the periodic FF.
All that being said, is it FF or bust for this team? It will be interesting to see who the talking heads on TV pick to be the FF teams. Will they look at the Purdue roster and say "Purdue should make the Final Four" or will they look at the Purdue roster and say "Purdue should make the Final Four, but you still have Painter coaching them in the tourney, so no, I can put them there"?
Final four if our newcomers are big contributors....we really lacked quickness last year and skill on the wings....if heide, Colvin, and Jones all prove to be valuable pieces and we avoid injuries then yeah final four should be an expectation....we'll find out early too with our schedule....we'll be well tested throughout the year....if we compete well then I'm with you on final four or bust....but we haven't had great teams the past few years....2018 was probably the last great team...but losing haas hurt us bad...the last few years we just weren't good enough to expect a final four....a returning npoy, experienced 4s, our best pg since Lewis Jackson, a promising SG, and depth everywhere with an infusion of athleticism at wing and back up pg should make us a serious contender...I don't think you could've said that about any other team since 2018.....
I think his teams are built off of the best guys that he's been able to get. Where he can't get guys with both elite athleticism and a high level of skill he's going to prioritize skill and has typically worked out better in the regular season than the NCAAT.
I do agree with other posters who have pointed out that the performance the last three seasons has been as much overachieving in the regular season as it is underachieving in the NCAAT. We'll find out the next few years where this year's team is a little older with the returning NCAA POY as a starting point and the two season's following should feature Smith, Loyer, TKR, Furst (one year) as upperclassmen supplemented by some really talented younger players.
I agree with everything you say. I just hope that Painter is thinking about March during Nov/Dec. That he let's Colvin and Heide play through their mistakes and learn on the floor as opposed to going with someone like Morton who he knows/trusts but has very little upside.
I think by starting Newman over Morton so late in the year showed painter his thoughts on that....he knows the upside is in the newcomers so I wouldn't be surprised to see mortons minutes cut back....the other interesting point will be whether we play heide in certain situations at the 4 when a team is quicker vs bigger at the 4....the one thing I'm interested in is the versatility this team will have....hopefully we will be able to play any style now with the depth that we have....I'd imagine certain games we'll play some guys more minutes than others and it will change game to game....
With sooo much depth at the 4 and 5 positions this year, wouldn't Heide be better off playing at the 2, when he's not playing the 3?
From what I have seen in videos, Heide looks more like a 3/4 than a 3/2. My suspicion is that it would be tough for him to guard quicker guards.
Too slow on D. Not good enough handle on O.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
Did Bragg stretch the law to prosecute Trump?
- Latest: BoilerBiker