Starting point guard next year?

[New Pal Boiler]

Will it be PJ or Weatherford? Or a 5th year transfer? Or a juco transfer? Or a late high school signee?

One can only assume that CMP has a plan in place, interesting to see it unfold.

 

[purdue4sure]

As of right now: Since PJ was backup and performed better than expected, he has the position by default. If Mathias can move over to the spot, he'll get minutes. Weatherford will be a freshman. Any minutes he gets on the floor at any position will be gravy.

 

[FLAG HUNTER]

The coaching staff surely knew this was going to happen quite a while ago, if they don't have someone in mind to go after, I will be disappointed in them.

 

[Boiler Buck]

Grant Weatherford

 

[dumpsterFyre]

No information that would suggest Grant would start over PJ.

 

[Cleanface]

Yeah!!

Another PG thread!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Boiler Buck]

Originally posted by dumpsterFyre:
No information that would suggest Grant would start over PJ.

Obviously both will play a lot of minutes next year. For one, GW has the advantage of being tenacious on D which Painter covets. Additionally, the Walker decommitment shows me that Painter might really expect big things from GW and that word is out on that in basketball circles and Walker just did not want to wait for PT behind two experienced defensive minded guards. Situationally PJT might go up against little guards like @ ILL, but a lot of situations will need a bigger tougher pg, thus if he acclimates like Mathias and Edwards did I believe GW will start more games as the season progresses......unless an unknown variable emerges at the 1 which given the state of college basketball could happen any day.

 

[rgarlitz]

Man, Bryson transferring is a blow. PJ really came on down the stretch, and that's good because I guess he's the guy now.

Something just doesn't add up about all of this. That's two major PG flame-outs in a row, and both look like ugly breakups. The position has been in limbo since LewJack graduated. It's obviously not sustainable to count on an annual 5th year transfer to keep the position afloat.

I'm not program insider, but it's getting more difficult for me to simply blame the players who are leaving. The staff simply has to do better at developing this position.

Is it possible that Painter's PG experience is actually a liability here? Has it given him a fairly narrow view of what the position ought to be?

 

[Boiler Buck]

I think people are underestimating how good Grant Weatherford could be....& I think Painter thinks so too. Like I mentioned in another thread Weatherford could be the next "Mike Kelly" of Wisconsin who was all D in the B1G and one tough hard nosed SOB who took his team to the FF, but like Weatherford wasn't much offensively and averaged around 4-5 ppg his entire career. But just controlled most games with his D...he was just so good.......and knocked the Boilers out of going to the FF I believe that year?

I think Painter has a TON of expectations for GW and I think people are starting to hear that and word is trickling out......thus you have the Walker decommit as he sees no PT here.

Now if Painter is wrong on GW- yes, there could be problems.

 

[CRBoiler]

Having two B1G teams in the final four should only help with recruiting (across the conference). Even if PJ and Weatherford exceed expectations, we need to get a high quality PG who can step in and help lead the team if at all possible. It will greatly increase our chances to be a top 15 team contending to win the conference and positioned to make a deep NCAA run. That's where we want to be. Let's go CMP & coaches!

 

[rgarlitz]

I don't know, CRBoiler. Wisconsin and MSU making the FF will undoubtedly help Wisconsin and MSU recruiting, but it's hard to see how it's going to help Purdue - a self-identifying "basketball school" that hasn't been to the FF in the 64-team era.

 

[bodog57]

It would be nice to know who our starting PG next season would be I suppose, but the question has been the same for a long time.

PJ is, and has been the closest to a true PG on the roster since JO played his last game. No doubt Painter was already keeping his eyes open for a PG prior to the end of the season. I loved Bryson's intensity and will miss him, but he didn't really have a position on the team except for a sometime sparkplug who brought intensity. He wasn't really a pg and as a sg...he couldn't shoot effectively.

Hopefully, the coaching staff can fix this ongoing hole in the roster.

Best of luck to Bryson.

 

[Heller]

I sincerely doubt that CJ decommited because he was scared of Weatherford or Thompson. More,likely he saw the fact that Painter couldn't make two guys with similar games happy even when one of them got 30 minutes a game.

 

[scottm.gjr]

I actually think Mathias could transition to a point guard if we need him to. He isn't going to wow anyone with his quickness, but he is our best passer and one of our better ball handlers as well. He brought it up the court some toward the end of the season and looked pretty good when he did. If he can play point for us I think it clearly makes us a better shooting team. Lineup would be Mathias, Stephens, Davis, Edwards, and Hammons. Cline adds shooting off the bench as well.

 

[mathboy]

Originally posted by Heller:
I sincerely doubt that CJ decommited because he was scared of Weatherford or Thompson. More,likely he saw the fact that Painter couldn't make two guys with similar games happy even when one of them got 30 minutes a game.

Walker committed too early. When I read his reasons for the decommitt, it sounded like he really did want to go through the recruiting process. He felt he had missed something important in his life. I don't think Purdue or not-Purdue was a big issue. He just wanted the fun of the recruiting visits, and he approached with the thought that he could land at any school. saw no particular issue with Purdue or Painter as coach.

Surprising to some, it is not always about the coach, style of play, or who is ahead of the kid on the team.

By the way, the blue bloods rarely get early commitments. Duke has zero 2016 verbals. So what? The best guys always commit late in the process. Getting someone early is generally a sign of bad things to come, IMHO. Either they change their mind, or they don't continue growing, or they fail to develop along the predicted line. I will take 'em late and well done, please.

 

[Boiler Buck]

Originally posted by Heller:
I sincerely doubt that CJ decommited because he was scared of Weatherford or Thompson. More,likely he saw the fact that Painter couldn't make two guys with similar games happy even when one of them got 30 minutes a game.

Never said "scared". What I am saying he sees Painter's style lending itself for minutes to GW & PJT and CJ's style would possibly jeopardize his minutes here. Just cause a guy is good and a better player does not mean his style fits here....and I think CJ just came up with that realization.

 

[scipiospinks]

I haven't heard great things about weatherford. Should be able to play defense but will be a liability on offense because he can't shoot and guys will sag off him.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Boiler Buck]

Originally posted by scipiospinks:
I haven't heard great things about weatherford. Should be able to play defense but will be a liability on offense because he can't shoot and guys will sag off him.

Posted from Rivals Mobile

Obviously Painter thinks GW is going to be a stud....just a defensive menace out there who you can't keep off the floor. We will see.?

 

[rgarlitz]

I hope, Boiler Buck. I hope.

Wasn't that also the basic plan for Bryson?

 

[lbodel]

There are multiple factors at play here.

1. Purdue runs a motion offense, which is less dependent on a point guard running the show.

2. Painter obviously stresses defense.

3. Painter stresses smart decision making.

I'm not sure why any of those are controversial. Bryson Scott did not play a lot at Purdue for a variety of reasons, we know this - and they aren't all basketball related (Painter AND Scott both have said previously that things had to be better on and off the court).

This year, Bryson shot 38% from the field, was 1-8 from 3, had 29 assists and 27 turnovers. Let's not act like we're running off the 2nd coming here.

It's pretty clear that Ronnie was an issue on the team, off the court. And if Bryson feels he can go somewhere else and play more minutes, who's to say there's anything wrong with it? Do you realize how many people transfer these days? It's really not uncommon.

 

[scipiospinks]

Originally posted by scipiospinks:
I haven't heard great things about weatherford. Should be able to play defense but will be a liability on offense because he can't shoot and guys will sag off him.
Posted from Rivals Mobile



Obviously Painter thinks GW is going to be a stud....just a defensive menace out there who you can't keep off the floor. We will see.?


Yea but he also thought that about scott and Ronnie Johnson. If he has a very limited offensive game, like I've been told by some high school coaches, his college career will largely hinge on the ability of the players around him. It's a liability if a guy can't shoot, but less so if the 4 other guys can.

The biggest problem with this team is the lack of a true creator at guard. Weatherford, Thompson, cline, Mathias, Stephens. Weatherford might be the strongest going to the bucket in that group, but that will be a challenge if no one respects his shot.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Like_a_Boss]

I think these guys will be a good addition to our PG rotation.

 

[BBG]

Originally posted by scipiospinks:
Originally posted by scipiospinks:

I haven't heard great things about weatherford. Should be able to play defense but will be a liability on offense because he can't shoot and guys will sag off him.

Posted from Rivals Mobile







Obviously Painter thinks GW is going to be a stud....just a defensive menace out there who you can't keep off the floor. We will see.?





Yea but he also thought that about scott and Ronnie Johnson. If he has a very limited offensive game, like I've been told by some high school coaches, his college career will largely hinge on the ability of the players around him. It's a liability if a guy can't shoot, but less so if the 4 other guys can.



The biggest problem with this team is the lack of a true creator at guard. Weatherford, Thompson, cline, Mathias, Stephens. Weatherford might be the strongest going to the bucket in that group, but that will be a challenge if no one respects his shot.

Posted from Rivals Mobile

Wait, are you responding to yourself?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[scipiospinks]

Originally posted by BBG:

Originally posted by scipiospinks:
Originally posted by scipiospinks:

I haven't heard great things about weatherford. Should be able to play defense but will be a liability on offense because he can't shoot and guys will sag off him.

Posted from Rivals Mobile


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++




Obviously Painter thinks GW is going to be a stud....just a defensive menace out there who you can't keep off the floor. We will see.?


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Yea but he also thought that about scott and Ronnie Johnson. If he has a very limited offensive game, like I've been told by some high school coaches, his college career will largely hinge on the ability of the players around him. It's a liability if a guy can't shoot, but less so if the 4 other guys can.



The biggest problem with this team is the lack of a true creator at guard. Weatherford, Thompson, cline, Mathias, Stephens. Weatherford might be the strongest going to the bucket in that group, but that will be a challenge if no one respects his shot.

Posted from Rivals Mobile

Wait, are you responding to yourself?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

No, I was on the mobile site and just copied the whole post I was responding to, which included my original post plus a post below it. I added some plus signs in between so the slower people on the board can follow along. Hope that helps, but please don't hesitate to reach out again if you still don't understand.

 

[BBG]

Originally posted by scipiospinks:

Originally posted by BBG:

Originally posted by scipiospinks:
Originally posted by scipiospinks:

I haven't heard great things about weatherford. Should be able to play defense but will be a liability on offense because he can't shoot and guys will sag off him.

Posted from Rivals Mobile


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++




Obviously Painter thinks GW is going to be a stud....just a defensive menace out there who you can't keep off the floor. We will see.?


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


Yea but he also thought that about scott and Ronnie Johnson. If he has a very limited offensive game, like I've been told by some high school coaches, his college career will largely hinge on the ability of the players around him. It's a liability if a guy can't shoot, but less so if the 4 other guys can.



The biggest problem with this team is the lack of a true creator at guard. Weatherford, Thompson, cline, Mathias, Stephens. Weatherford might be the strongest going to the bucket in that group, but that will be a challenge if no one respects his shot.

Posted from Rivals Mobile

Wait, are you responding to yourself?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

No, I was on the mobile site and just copied the whole post I was responding to, which included my original post plus a post below it. I added some plus signs in between so the slower people on the board can follow along. Hope that helps, but please don't hesitate to reach out again if you still don't understand.

Well it's not a matter of anyone not understanding rather you not knowing how to use the quote feature. I was merely asking because the way you did it, made it look like you were responding to yourself. If you want to be a douche about it then that is your problem.