Basically everyone is just “paper good” then. Only 8 active coaches with a national title.
This. Must have range. No more post only guys.
This just seems absurd to me. You take the best players you can get and adjust style of play around them.
But most teams as a number one seed got by the first round...basically. I bet that is like 99%.
Understand the critique, but Zach was never the issue. If he had just one consistent star guard, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
Not when those styles prove ineffective at the most important times.
The national champ last season featured two strong low post centers. I will continue to argue that if you can’t hit open shots, it doesn’t matter what style you play.
Edey's efg% was 60.7% and we only had 1 guard over 50% (Smith 51.7%). Every guy who played more than 7 minutes a game for IU had a higher efg% percentage than Loyer. That's 10 if you're counting.
Spot on but I'll make one correction. Replace "main" with "only" in your last sentence.
This is but one paradox I can't reason. Why would some "system" be so effective during the season against many good teams, but then be inferior when the light was switched...many times against what was considered an inferior team? What is the "proof" that the "system" is ineffective? I have an idea of the type of team I prefer which is a bit different, but I can't reason out the paradox submitted by "many" on this system. Perhaps it has nothing to do with the "system" and all to do with something else? Did all the Big teams that struggled in the tourney have the "same system" as Purdue over the years?
I have my "preference" in the type of team offensively and defensively not only with players but approach. However, with what I might consider "inferior approaches", all come down to execution. It always has been and will always be about execution of whatever approach is taken. An inferior approach can beat a superior approach...especially in a single game if the execution efficiency differences are large enough to make a difference. If "efficiency" was NOT the single biggest consideration, there would be no need for any stats to be considered...just what "approach" was taken. We know this to be true, but instead depict something different as the answer.
Yes.
The question/discussion is about offers we have made to bigs. It's not a critique of last years team. I love Zach, and I'm glad we have him for one more year. But there isn't another Zach Edey walking in the door. That said, I would prefer a more mobile big who can pick and pop and force defenses further out to guard him. I would really prefer two 4's that can do that and not have a traditional 5 at all. But the thread was about the offers we have made to bigs so far. If we're going to have a 5 I'd like it to be one that can stretch the defense and also be able to get out and defend on the pick and roll and not be forced to play drop coverage every time. Versatility being the key word.
A low post big man is easy to game plan for. A low post big who can't play on the perimeter also limits what you're perimeter players can do since you're going to have clogged up driving ranges if the big can't draw his man out.
You might be missing the point. The reason we had open (wide open) outside shots was because of our post player. Had we been able to shoot at our average, FDU would have been buried in the first ten minutes. It was the center (Edey) that made those open looks possible.
The FdU coach called his shot against us. We should have been passed and steamroller them. Instead we were scared.
Probably a poor term, "Fluke". It was a psychological defeat. We were some how destroyed in the confidence to shoot baskets. Had very little to do with the essential skills with our players.
IMO it’s nothing more than a streak of ridiculously bad mojo for Purdue in March —
We've had this discussion in some variation a bunch of times. If you can land a bunch of NBA guys in your back court and at wing that's awesome, go do it and surround them with a big who may not be a low post scoring threat but can defend in space on defense and spread the floor on offense. If you're not able to do that, and Painter hasn't been able to, you go get the best players you can and adjust your system accordingly to compliment their strengths.
If you think that's the variable that caused last year's team to fail in the NCAAT you have to ask yourself whether the result changes if you adjust that variable. From my perspective if you pull Zach off of that team and try to run a more 'modern' offense they're a borderline NCAAT team. Caleb Furst and Mason Gillis likely have much better stats but overall the team was just too young and not good enough to be a real contender.
So, what you're really saying is that Painter go outcoached....badly.
Problem is, Painter surrounded a dominant low post player with guys who can really only shoot. We didn't have a single slasher on the team last year who could get their own bucket. Then, those guys you're relying on to make open 3s become very one-dimensional, making the team that much easier to defensive game plan for.
The problem of having only shooters is significantly compounded when those shooters struggle to shoot
I’m fine if the center doesn’t have range as long as we don’t try and build the offense around them. That sisco looking guy from Virginia(diakite) is cool with me. A long, athletic guy that can rebound, switch on defense, guard the rim, rebound, PnR, and run the floor is ideal for me. If they have an outside shot, even better. The center position is easily the least important position imo, yet we continue to make it our focus.
Do you think Purdue would have beat Bama if they met in the tourney?
"Should" be better? What happens if they're not?
But, Edey has to show (or more likely, Painter has to let him) step out and take/make the 12-15 footer. If he can't/won't, then there's always going to be a big waiting in the lane for the drivers because they won't have to contest Edey's jumpers.The problem of having only shooters is significantly compounded when those shooters struggle to shoot
I'd be pleasantly surprised to see much iso run for Colvin and Heide in the half court as I'd take that to mean they're really gifted / advanced. If they're ready to do that Zach's presence can significantly help them as teams will be very hesitant to leave him to bring help from the off side.
Agree with the center or 5 being the least important. PG is by far the most important, but it's where Painter has had the most struggles recruiting.
I like the way you titled this thread made me look. Good job
Pretty much. You are correct. Our 3-pt shooting fell off the table at the end of the season. Watch this next year. We will start out hot as all hell from 3. Let's hope we can maintain it. Our 3-pt shooting got us into the E-8 a few years ago, and almost into the FF. If we had the 3-pt shooting we started the year with, we would have run FDU out of the gym.
Wasn't easy for the 29 games we won with Zach largely dominating foes who might have "easily" gamed-planned against us.
I may be misunderstanding but that doesn't make sense to me. Teams stopped having their big leave Zach to play help defense about halfway through last season because they were getting killed with lob passes as Zach went to the basket and Purdue just lobbed it up to him.
I'm cool with that too so long as we have all Americans at guards and wings. I posted it before but it's worth repeating, if you take a guy like Diakite and put him on Purdue's team last year instead of Zach you end up with an NCAAT bubble team.
My recollection is the same. Smith and Edey were fairly successful at forcing teams to make a choice on the pick and roll, help off Edey to stop a driving Smith (risking the lob back to Edey) or leave Smith an opening for a driving layup.
