Purdue v. Michigan State Game Thread

[Purdue85]

Are you kidding me? Seriously? Are you trying to convince some of us that Painter drew up that play exactly as it was ran? They all looked like Keystone Cops in the paint. My mouth was open watching the chaos unfold at the rim thinking they'd be getting a 5 second call. No coach draws up a play where everyone goes in the paint and bumps into each other like lost robots. like that. I'm pretty stoked that we won, but it was a busted play that Tre managed to break free from and hit the little drop. That play was all 100% Tre making something out of nothing.

I think you're being hyper-critical.

The play wasn't horrible, and is typical of any play with less than 10 seconds on the clock in a 1 point game: the defensive players were amped and on their men like glue, willing to push the limits of contact (just short of fouling); the offensive players were busting their @sses simultaneously setting screens (picks) and flashing to look for the ball.

I thought we set up a bit shallow, but that's a minor correction, and easy to happen at that moment.

Not sure what was the point of Newman in the corner, other than making sure his man was nowhere near the ball defensively, and not congesting the play.

It's easy to pick apart a play like that, but doesn't make much sense with a game like that, and at that point in the game. Especially considering the fantastic 2nd half job by both players and coaches, resulting in what should be a very happy time, and not one worthy of a string in a thread like this.

 

[boiler-deuce]

Because the "game comment" was a back handed stab at the coach from a guy that openly wants him fired...or have you changed your position?

So, then use your brain if you have one, and find a counter point. The inability to do so make your position weak sauce. And, no, my position has not changed. If we ever fall into a streak of years in the cellar again, I'll want him gone. He has once again made progress and needs to maintain this momentum. He's been here long enough to do that. There is no excuse for sitting at the bottom for years. We are not Northwestern.

 

[Poprudy]

Zero denial this play was CMP at his finest and the players committed to it. He out coached Izzo and that's what we should be talking about.

 

[boiler-deuce]

I think you're being hyper-critical.

The play wasn't horrible, and is typical of any play with less than 10 seconds on the clock in a 1 point game: the defensive players were amped and on their men like glue, willing to push the limits of contact (just short of fouling); the offensive players were busting their @sses simultaneously setting screens (picks) and flashing to look for the ball.

I thought we set up a bit shallow, but that's a minor correction, and easy to happen at that moment.

Not sure what was the point of Newman in the corner, other than making sure his man was nowhere near the ball defensively, and not congesting the play.

It's easy to pick apart a play like that, but doesn't make much sense with a game like that, and at that point in the game. Especially considering the fantastic 2nd half job by both players and coaches, resulting in what should be a very happy time, and not one worthy of a string in a thread like this.

This right here. It should be a happy time, but some folks have to use the win as cudgel to beat other posters here. Get to the root problem here. Plenty of us get on here and post our thoughts and opinions, to only have clowns then direct the next comment at that person. And, they hold on to the opinions for years so they can drag them out and use them as an insult when they have the opportunity. So, if you want to get on your soapbox and point blame, start with those who can't be tolerant of opposing views. If all you want is an echo chamber of nothing but opinions you agree with, then I guess ignore the heck out of folks.

 

[PurdueDave]

So, then use your brain if you have one, and find a counter point. The inability to do so make your position weak sauce. And, no, my position has not changed. If we ever fall into a streak of years in the cellar again, I'll want him gone. He has once again made progress and needs to maintain this momentum. He's been here long enough to do that. There is no excuse for sitting at the bottom for years. We are not Northwestern.

So rewatch the play and keep your eye on Tre. He dosen't move untul he pops to the side. All the other movement is either 1st or 2nd options (Tre being third) or was run as misdirection. Either way a beautiful play. Stop hating on Painter so much and maybe you can see it.

 

[boiler-deuce]

So rewatch the play and keep your eye on Tre. He dosen't move untul he pops to the side. All the other movement is either 1st or 2nd options (Tre being third) or was run as misdirection. Either way a beautiful play. Stop hating on Painter so much and maybe you can see it.

I have watched it over and over. I see everyone run into the paint and into a big mosh pit. As Tre is catching the ball there are 7 players in the paint. While he's catching it, Sash and Gillis are running out of the paint leaving all defenders still in the paint with Tre all alone. Not one single player has screened Tre free. They evacuate the paint leaving 4 defenders and Tre when he gets the pass. If that play was designed to be a screen, then they would have remained on their men and actually created a "Screen". Instead they rubbed each other and ran to the perimeter TOGETHER one behind the other. Gillis actually follows Sasha out of the paint leaving all defenders behind to defend Tre. It was a busted play and Tre made a silk purse out of a sows ear.

 

[IUhaterade]

Are you kidding me? Seriously? Are you trying to convince some of us that Painter drew up that play exactly as it was ran? They all looked like Keystone Cops in the paint. My mouth was open watching the chaos unfold at the rim thinking they'd be getting a 5 second call. No coach draws up a play where everyone goes in the paint and bumps into each other like lost robots. like that. I'm pretty stoked that we won, but it was a busted play that Tre managed to break free from and hit the little drop. That play was all 100% Tre making something out of nothing.

I saw it as a play designed specifically to get Tre open, as there was some difficulty getting it to him on the previous play.

 

[PurdueDave]

I have watched it over and over. I see everyone run into the paint and into a big mosh pit. As Tre is catching the ball there are 7 players in the paint. While he catching it, Sash and Gillis are running out of the paint leaving all defenders still in the paint with Tre all alone. Not one single player has screened Tre free. They evacuate the paint leaving 4 defenders and Tre when he gets the pass. If that play was designed to be a screen, then they would have remained on their men and actually created a "Screen". Instead they rubbed each other and ran to the perimeter TOGETHER one behind the other. Gillis actually follows Sasha out of the paint leaving all defenders behind to defend Tre. It was a busted play and Tre made a silk purse out of a sows ear.

You're correct, nobody screened for Tre, thus my point on the other movement being misdirection. Why else does Tre just stand there until he pops to the side?

 

[IUhaterade]

You're correct, nobody screened for Tre, thus my point on the other movement being misdirection. Why else does Tre just stand there until he pops to the side?

Exactly. What occured was what was drawn up.

 

[Purdue85]

I saw it as a play designed specifically to get Tre open, as there was some difficulty getting it to him on the previous play.

EXACTLY.

Thank you.

Tre had destroyed MSU in the 2nd half.

Also, (and this cannot be stated enough) MSU defense was simply going to "blow up" any screen Purdue offered up. And, they were NOT going to be called for a foul.

Anyone expecting a clean offensive in-bound play in that situation simply isn't being realistic.

 

[boiler-deuce]

You're correct, nobody screened for Tre, thus my point on the other movement being misdirection. Why else does Tre just stand there until he pops to the side?

Yes, Tre does pops out. It does feel like he was option number one. I think the intention was he takes the shot. He's the best player on the team. I think the play went nothing like it was designed or drawn up. You think it did. Great. We won.

 

[Purdue85]

Yes, Tre does pops out. It does feel like he was option number one. I think the intention was he takes the shot. He's the best player on the team. I think the play went nothing like it was designed or drawn up. You think it did. Great. We won.

Tre goes away from the ball, sets a screen, then comes back. I think his movement was exactly what was designed. I think he might have gotten the ball a bit farther away from the rim than Painter would have liked.

The defense is never going to let that (or any other play) happen without doing everything to blow it up. Ever. Not sure why you're fighting that point. That's key to the entire conversation, and the only relevant point, IMHO.

It wasn't the poor offensive execution, or the choice of the play (stack vs flat vs box vs triangle vs anthyingelsewewouldrun), or Matt Painter's coaching. There was no magical play Matt Painter could have been "drawn up" that MSU wasn't going to "blow up".

Get the ball to Tre. That's it.

 

[boiler-deuce]

Tre goes away from the ball, sets a screen, then comes back. I think his movement was exactly what was designed. I think he might have gotten the ball a bit farther away from the rim than Painter would have liked.

The defense is never going to let that (or any other play) happen without doing everything to blow it up. Ever. Not sure why you're fighting that point. That's key to the entire conversation, and the only relevant point, IMHO.

It wasn't the poor offensive execution, or the choice of the play (stack vs flat vs box vs triangle vs anthyingelsewewouldrun), or Matt Painter's coaching. There was no magical play Matt Painter could have been "drawn up" that MSU wasn't going to "blow up".

Get the ball to Tre. That's it.

Yes, Tre does pops out. It does feel like he was option number one. I think the intention was he takes the shot. He's the best player on the team. I think the play went nothing like it was designed or drawn up. You think it did. Great. We won.

 

[Purdue85]

Yes, Tre does pops out. It does feel like he was option number one. I think the intention was he takes the shot. He's the best player on the team. I think the play went nothing like it was designed or drawn up. You think it did. Great. We won.

And there was NO play that was going to go as it was drawn up.

Not in that situation.

That doesn't mean it was a bad play, bad coaching, or bad execution.

Point of fact: We got exactly what we wanted... Tre with the ball.

 

[boiler-deuce]

And there was NO play that was going to go as it was drawn up.

Not in that situation.

That doesn't mean it was a bad play, bad coaching, or bad execution.

Point of fact: We got exactly what we wanted... Tre with the ball.

Yes, Tre does pops out. It does feel like he was option number one. I think the intention was he takes the shot. He's the best player on the team. I think the play went nothing like it was designed or drawn up. You think it did. Great. We won.

 

[NashvilleBoiler]

Tre goes away from the ball, sets a screen, then comes back. I think his movement was exactly what was designed. I think he might have gotten the ball a bit farther away from the rim than Painter would have liked.

The defense is never going to let that (or any other play) happen without doing everything to blow it up. Ever. Not sure why you're fighting that point. That's key to the entire conversation, and the only relevant point, IMHO.

It wasn't the poor offensive execution, or the choice of the play (stack vs flat vs box vs triangle vs anthyingelsewewouldrun), or Matt Painter's coaching. There was no magical play Matt Painter could have been "drawn up" that MSU wasn't going to "blow up".

Get the ball to Tre. That's it.

Question: Did CMP draw up that play? I was trying to watch the huddle, and I thought I saw Painter towards the outside. I may have seen incorrectly (#drinking). This has not been one of Painter's strengths. If he assigned that task to someone else, then major props. Regardless -> W. BTFU!

 

[IUhaterade]

@boiler-deuce now you’re just being an a$$

 

[boiler-deuce]

@boiler-deuce now you’re just being an a$$

Ad homs. The weapon of children.

 

[IUhaterade]

Ad homs. The weapon of children.

Seems like you aren’t very sure on what an ad hom is. This is not an example of one.

 

[spradecki]

Tre goes away from the ball, sets a screen, then comes back. I think his movement was exactly what was designed. I think he might have gotten the ball a bit farther away from the rim than Painter would have liked.

The defense is never going to let that (or any other play) happen without doing everything to blow it up. Ever. Not sure why you're fighting that point. That's key to the entire conversation, and the only relevant point, IMHO.

It wasn't the poor offensive execution, or the choice of the play (stack vs flat vs box vs triangle vs anthyingelsewewouldrun), or Matt Painter's coaching. There was no magical play Matt Painter could have been "drawn up" that MSU wasn't going to "blow up".

Get the ball to Tre. That's it.

not sure what the play was. but that far away was the only way he can get a clean shot up. probably surprised MSU as much as me. had he caught it closer to the rim he would have been mugged and likely shooting free throws

 

[boiler-deuce]

Seems like you aren’t very sure on what an ad hom is. This is not an example of one.

ad ho·mi·nem
/ˌad ˈhämənəm/

adjective


"an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining"

 

[Bethboilerfan]

Are you kidding me? Seriously? Are you trying to convince some of us that Painter drew up that play exactly as it was ran? They all looked like Keystone Cops in the paint. My mouth was open watching the chaos unfold at the rim thinking they'd be getting a 5 second call. No coach draws up a play where everyone goes in the paint and bumps into each other like lost robots. like that. I'm pretty stoked that we won, but it was a busted play that Tre managed to break free from and hit the little drop. That play was all 100% Tre making something out of nothing.

I think you may have seen that “chaos in the paint” as different than I did. That was a planned play (ploy) to totally confuse Izzo and his team. And - We won!

 

[IUhaterade]

ad ho·mi·nem
/ˌad ˈhämənəm/

adjective


"an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining"

Exactly. I didn’t make an irrelevant argument against you. I simply pointed out how you are behaving.

I’m done here. Have a good day. It’s difficult to tell we even won last night on this thread. Makes me sorry that I read it.

 

[Purdue85]

Yes, Tre does pops out. It does feel like he was option number one. I think the intention was he takes the shot. He's the best player on the team. I think the play went nothing like it was designed or drawn up. You think it did. Great. We won.

I don't think I've ever said the play went as it was designed or drawn up. In fact, I've said the opposite. I've said there's no way MSU was going to let the play go down without blowing it up. That's what happened.

We also got what we wanted, which was Tre with the ball down low.

 

[boiler-deuce]

I think you may have seen that “chaos in the paint” as different than I did. That was a planned play (ploy) to totally confuse Izzo and his team. And - We won!

Yes, we see things differently. We won!

 

[boiler-deuce]

Exactly. I didn’t make an irrelevant argument against you. I simply pointed out how you are behaving.

I’m done here. Have a good day. It’s difficult to tell we even won last night on this thread. Makes me sorry that I read it.

Yes, please move on.

 

[boiler-deuce]

I don't think I've ever said the play went as it was designed or drawn up. In fact, I've said the opposite. I've said there's no way MSU was going to let the play go down without blowing it up. That's what happened.

We also got what we wanted, which was Tre with the ball down low.

Seriously? At what point do you just stop? I didn't see things as you did. Move on. We won.

 

[Purdue85]

Seriously? At what point do you just stop? I didn't see things as you did. Move on. We won.

Seriously? Indeed.

I literally said,"...there was NO play that was going to go as it was drawn up", to which you replied, "I think the play went nothing like it was designed or drawn up. You think it did."

I did no such thing. I stated the exact opposite of what you wrote. That's completely unnecessary, disingenuous, and wrong to do.

You keep harping on this, seemingly intent on arguing.

If you choose to post that I said something, when in fact I said the opposite, I'll likely choose to respond and point out the inaccuracy. It's that simple.

 

[boiler-deuce]

Seriously? Indeed.

I literally said,"...there was NO play that was going to go as it was drawn up", to which you replied, "I think the play went nothing like it was designed or drawn up. You think it did."

I did no such thing. I stated the exact opposite of what you wrote. That's completely unnecessary, disingenuous, and wrong to do.

You keep harping on this, seemingly intent on arguing.

If you choose to post that I said something, when in fact I said the opposite, I'll likely choose to respond and point out the inaccuracy. It's that simple.

Ok, you're totally right! Good enough? Or, do you just need the last word? Lemme know.

 

[Purdue85]

Ok, you're totally right! Good enough? Or, do you just need the last word? Lemme know.

Dude, it's not about being "right", or getting the last word.

What you posted about what I said was wrong, and you willfully mischaracterized what I said. I (literally) said the opposite of how you tried to portray me.

What's more, I'm being very nice when I use the word "mischaracterized".

We don't need to do this, but I'm not going to let you say I said one thing when I clearly said the opposite.

 

[boiler-deuce]

Dude, it's not about being "right", or getting the last word.

What you posted about what I said was wrong, and you willfully mischaracterized what I said. I (literally) said the opposite of how you tried to portray me.

What's more, I'm being very nice when I use the word "mischaracterized".

We don't need to do this, but I'm not going to let you say I said one thing when I clearly said the opposite.

okay LOL

 

[Roeder]

CMP subs in Zach Edey.....interesting move, there.

I wonder if Painter learned from not putting Tre in during that missed FT by Ty Jerome in Elite 8. Tre would have more than likely grabbed that rebound with his big paws. Great substitution to have Edey's length in to get hand on the ball.

Also Gillis is a warrior. He wanted that ball more than anyone on the floor. Any hesitation and MSU likely has time to call TO.

 

[pu1985]

Simply ...the most Un-Purdue finish to a basketball game I’ve seen in many, many years.
Let’s have more of those!
Boiler up!

 

[Schnelk]

Evidently I was right about him all along and therefore withdraw the apology I made last night. You remain on ignore because you are indeed an ass.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

Simply ...the most Un-Purdue finish to a basketball game I’ve seen in many, many years.
Let’s have more of those!
Boiler up!

Different games, but the way last night's game played out reminded me a little bit of one almost 38 years ago....the '83 Purdue game @ Illinois, where Purdue trailed by 20 with 12 minutes left...then scored the last 18 points of the game to win on Jim Rowinski's unlikely game-winning jumper. The bank stayed open late that evening for Purdue.

In both games, the Boilers couldn't get much going on the road against a tough conference opponent.....and looked headed for a certain loss.....until snatching victory from the jaws of defeat in the end.

As stated, Purdue followers aren't used to that.....but we sure wouldn't mind trying.

Enjoy the weekend.

 

[mathboy]

A lot of folks are posting about oour offensive production in the second half. The truth is that we played better defense than offense. MSU really struggled to score in the second half, and committed 14 turnovers (I think that was the count). Defense won that game for us. We scored less than 30 points in the second half, and that won't win many games without smothering defense to go with it.

I honestly think we have unexpectedly kicked MSU's ass more than any other opponents. More upsets and bigger upsets that any of the other BIG teams we play. Kind'a nice, I think.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

A lot of folks are posting about oour offensive production in the second half. The truth is that we played better defense than offense. MSU really struggled to score in the second half, and committed 14 turnovers (I think that was the count). Defense won that game for us. We scored less than 30 points in the second half, and that won't win many games without smothering defense to go with it.

I honestly think we have unexpectedly kicked MSU's ass more than any other opponents. More upsets and bigger upsets that any of the other BIG teams we play. Kind'a nice, I think.

I agree with you about the defense, Mathboy - Purdue outscored Michigan State 39-23 in the second half. Getting back in the game with a really good defensive run at the start of the second half was certainly one of the keys....there was a 3-minute scoreless drought, and Purdue held them to 7 points through the first 9 minutes of the second half. Frankly, I think it got the Spartans off their game somewhat. That's where they really miss a player like Cassius Winston, IMO.

I think some of the Michigan State followers are thinking they may miss the NCAA tournament this year, but I would still expect them to be there....and potentially be a tough draw if they figure some things out....a similar position in which Purdue could be.....though I like the Boilers' trajectory right now....need to keep it going next week.

We shall see.

 

[Poprudy]

Heard Coach dip sh*t got banned. Now he's on that other board raging about us. Man, I love it when we are rent free in their heads. That guy needs help in a major way.

 

[tjreese]

Seriously? Indeed.

I literally said,"...there was NO play that was going to go as it was drawn up", to which you replied, "I think the play went nothing like it was designed or drawn up. You think it did."

I did no such thing. I stated the exact opposite of what you wrote. That's completely unnecessary, disingenuous, and wrong to do.

You keep harping on this, seemingly intent on arguing.

If you choose to post that I said something, when in fact I said the opposite, I'll likely choose to respond and point out the inaccuracy. It's that simple.

it is rare that plays go as plan. You create a situation, an environement and then its up to the players

 

[tjreese]

Heard Coach dip sh*t got banned. Now he's on that other board raging about us. Man, I love it when we are rent free in their heads. That guy needs help in a major way.

wonder why? I posted the thread about the flex cut looking for the IU fans to give me an idea how often it is used since I don't watch them much. It has always been my understanding that IU fans know more about basketball than Purdue fans