Transfers 2018

[Do Dah Day]

Pointless to have discussions with people who can't admit when they're wrong. @bonefish1 based much of his opinion on Boudreaux by saying he didn't have a lot of high major offers. When he was shown that Boudreaux actually did get more than a handful of high major offers in the last several months, he ignored it and failed to admit he was wrong. Can't respect someone like that.

Per Bonerfish, his royal highness of coaching intellect --- "
I could care less about fundamentals. Few high-major players lack fundamentals. They might not always make the right decision on the court but I'll take a great athlete who can create their shot.
The whole 'Basketball IQ" thing is garbage. Whatever it is, it's not going to win as many games as having 5 athletes who are more physically gifted.?

 

[SKYDOG]

Wasn’t Hummel a top 50 recruit coming out of high school?

https://n.rivals.com/search#?query=...abbreviation%22:%22%22,%22page_number%22:1%7D

 

[Gemini95]

Wasn’t Hummel a top 50 recruit coming out of high school?

Keep moving that target

 

[bonefish1]

Per Bonerfish, his royal highness of coaching intellect --- "
I could care less about fundamentals. Few high-major players lack fundamentals. They might not always make the right decision on the court but I'll take a great athlete who can create their shot.
The whole 'Basketball IQ" thing is garbage. Whatever it is, it's not going to win as many games as having 5 athletes who are more physically gifted.?

Yup, I typed that, and I stand by it. I’ll take an athletically gifted player over a player less athletic but who has a higher basketball IQ (whatever that is. I’m still waiting on someone to define it for me) all day.
Who had the highest B.B. IQ for the Boilers this year? I’ll bet you say Mathias.

 

[bonefish1]

https://n.rivals.com/search#?query=Robbie Hummel&formValues=%7B%22sport%22:%22Basketball%22,%22prospect_profiles.position_group_abbreviation%22:%22%22,%22prospect_profiles.position_abbreviation%22:%22%22,%22page_number%22:1%7D[/QUOTE

Ok, he was ranked 75.....I was close.
But I always liked Hummel. Great player. Why was he brought up?

 

[Purdue85]

Wasn’t Hummel a top 50 recruit coming out of high school?

No. E'Twaun and JaJuan were.

It likely depended which rating service you looked at. Rob was 75th, per Rivals.

 

[Purdue85]

Yup, I typed that, and I stand by it. I’ll take an athletically gifted player over a player less athletic but who has a higher basketball IQ (whatever that is. I’m still waiting on someone to define it for me) all day.
Who had the highest B.B. IQ for the Boilers this year? I’ll bet you say Mathias.

Seriously?

Simply stated, it's a blend of instinct and ability. Or, if you prefer: a combination of awareness/understanding/skill.

That probably goes a long way toward explaining why you don't recognize that Larry Bird's game transcends generations.

 

[Gemini95]

But I always liked Hummel. Great player. Why was he brought up?

To show you that "6'8 below the rim players" can be good.

 

[BoilerAndy]

Wasn’t Hummel a top 50 recruit coming out of high school?

Pathetic.

 

[bonefish1]

Seriously?

Simply stated, it's a blend of instinct and ability. Or, if you prefer: a combination of awareness/understanding/skill.

That probably goes a long way toward explaining why you don't recognize that Larry Bird's game transcends generations.

Ok, I’ll ask again: who had the highest IQ on the PU team?
Can you have a great athlete who also has high B.B. iq?
Who on the Boilers would that be?

 

[bonefish1]

To show you that "6'8 below the rim players" can be good.

I never said anything about Hummel. You did.

 

[Purdue85]

Ok, I’ll ask again: who had the highest IQ on the PU team?
Can you have a great athlete who also has high B.B. iq?
Who on the Boilers would that be?

Dude, really?

Do you work hard to be a d*ck, or does it just come naturally?

 

[JohnnyDoeBoiler]

Dude, really?

Do you work hard to be a d*ck, or does it just come naturally?

I'll go back to what I initially said....douche.

Bone has been unusually rough and abrasive before, which I can appreciate to a certain extent...but this is on another level for him

 

[Beeazlebub]

I'll go back to what I initially said....douche.

Bone has been unusually rough and abrasive before, which I can appreciate to a certain extent...but this is on another level for him

I don't agree with bonefish on much of anything, and it's possible this is a professional troll-job, but I don't like the "basketball IQ" term either. It's generally reserved, as he implied, for players who are lacking in some area, most notably speed/athleticism.

Collective IQ of a team, how well they play together on both offense and defense, is more meaningful IMO

 

[Do Dah Day]

I don't agree with bonefish on much of anything, and it's possible this is a professional troll-job, but I don't like the "basketball IQ" term either. It's generally reserved, as he implied, for players who are lacking in some area, most notably speed/athleticism.

Collective IQ of a team, how well they play together on both offense and defense, is more meaningful IMO

Two thoughts:
1. It is a commonly used term, prevalent in most media when evaluating many players. It does have a meaning to those who use it. My opinion is that it is used for a player who has high anticipation, thus making him play "quicker" by anticipating what is going to happen and taking action based on that rather than waiting for it to start happening. Much of that is based on a deep understanding of the game, how it's played, and how certain players, including their teammates, play. I'm sure there is more complexity, but I like simple things.
2. If BB IQ is not important, then the best athletes don't need to waste their time watching film, only the less athletic players need to do that.

 

[Do Dah Day]

I'll go back to what I initially said....douche.

Bone has been unusually rough and abrasive before, which I can appreciate to a certain extent...but this is on another level for him

This thread needs to go to 8 pages - so, I'll ask ... How does his arrogant belittling of fellow fans based on stupid, baseless theories earn any appreciation?

 

[asby]

I just hope he can be as good as Travis "tacos" Carroll!

 

[ChoiceBeef]

I just hope he can be as good as Travis "tacos" Carroll!

Blasphemy!

 

[BoilerBiker]

I don't agree with bonefish on much of anything, and it's possible this is a professional troll-job, but I don't like the "basketball IQ" term either. It's generally reserved, as he implied, for players who are lacking in some area, most notably speed/athleticism.

Collective IQ of a team, how well they play together on both offense and defense, is more meaningful IMO

and mathias is also a "gym rat"

 

[Gemini95]

I never said anything about Hummel. You did.

I give up

 

[Purdue85]

Two thoughts:
1. It is a commonly used term, prevalent in most media when evaluating many players. It does have a meaning to those who use it. My opinion is that it is used for a player who has high anticipation, thus making him play "quicker" by anticipating what is going to happen and taking action based on that rather than waiting for it to start happening. Much of that is based on a deep understanding of the game, how it's played, and how certain players, including their teammates, play. I'm sure there is more complexity, but I like simple things.
2. If BB IQ is not important, then the best athletes don't need to waste their time watching film, only the less athletic players need to do that.

Points I would add:

1. We're not the only people to use this term.
2. This is also a common concept in different sports. I've coached baseball for different age groups. Baseball IQ refers to someone who really knows and understands the game, goes to the proper place on contact (covering a base, backing up, getting in position for cutoff, etc.) and has ZERO to do with athleticism. In other words, it's used with the highly athletic, as well as those who aren't athletic at all.
3. A variation of the term is used for pitchers, identifying them as "throwers vs pitchers". A thrower rares back and lets it fly. A pitcher works the hitter, works the count, masters command and control of pitches, knows when to throw each, knows when not to throw each, etc.

Those points simply underscore the issue of (sport) I.Q.

I've seen many kids who could hit the h*ll out of a baseball, fly around the bases, throw the ball a country mile, but were utterly clueless on the field. Ditto, the kids who can throw with velocity, but can't manage the game to be successful.

 

[Do Dah Day]

Points I would add:

1. We're not the only people to use this term.
2. This is also a common concept in different sports. I've coached baseball for different age groups. Baseball IQ refers to someone who really knows and understands the game, goes to the proper place on contact (covering a base, backing up, getting in position for cutoff, etc.) and has ZERO to do with athleticism. In other words, it's used with the highly athletic, as well as those who aren't athletic at all.
3. A variation of the term is used for pitchers, identifying them as "throwers vs pitchers". A thrower rares back and lets it fly. A pitcher works the hitter, works the count, masters command and control of pitches, knows when to throw each, knows when not to throw each, etc.

Those points simply underscore the issue of (sport) I.Q.

I've seen many kids who could hit the h*ll out of a baseball, fly around the bases, throw the ball a country mile, but were utterly clueless on the field. Ditto, the kids who can throw with velocity, but can't manage the game to be successful.

well said!!!

 

[Beeazlebub]

Points I would add:

1. We're not the only people to use this term.
2. This is also a common concept in different sports. I've coached baseball for different age groups. Baseball IQ refers to someone who really knows and understands the game, goes to the proper place on contact (covering a base, backing up, getting in position for cutoff, etc.) and has ZERO to do with athleticism. In other words, it's used with the highly athletic, as well as those who aren't athletic at all.
3. A variation of the term is used for pitchers, identifying them as "throwers vs pitchers". A thrower rares back and lets it fly. A pitcher works the hitter, works the count, masters command and control of pitches, knows when to throw each, knows when not to throw each, etc.

Those points simply underscore the issue of (sport) I.Q.

I've seen many kids who could hit the h*ll out of a baseball, fly around the bases, throw the ball a country mile, but were utterly clueless on the field. Ditto, the kids who can throw with velocity, but can't manage the game to be successful.

While I agree with all this, I think it's much easier to use terms involving IQ when you're coaching vs the casual fan or opining as an "expert" analyst. For the latter, labels can be used as a sloppy way to sound knowledgeable to casual observers, and it's in that case that I'm most annoyed.

 

[Purdue85]

While I agree with all this, I think it's much easier to use terms involving IQ when you're coaching vs the casual fan or opining as an "expert" analyst. For the latter, labels can be used as a sloppy way to sound knowledgeable to casual observers, and it's in that case that I'm most annoyed.

spot on.

I've heard this phrase used most appropriately between coaches when talking about what separates one particular player. It's not a number, but an observation.

 

[buffboiler]

I can give you an example of a gifted athlete without high IQ: Ex Bears QB Cade McNown.

A great athlete with gifted arm and physique, but with pea sized IQ for the game.

And another great example from Purdue, even with BonXXXXX1's attitude, is Jeff George: a cannon of arm for shooting down his own team, while blaming everything to others. Always me first..

No need for another one in this board..

 

[Do Dah Day]

I can give you an example of a gifted athlete without high IQ: Ex Bears QB Cade McNown.

A great athlete with gifted arm and physique, but with pea sized IQ for the game.

And another great example from Purdue, even with BonXXXXX1's attitude, is Jeff George: a cannon of arm for shooting down his own team, while blaming everything to others. Always me first..

No need for another one in this board..

GREAT POST!!

It's Boner-fish1 ... like.. "I smell tuna." And yes, I am in a pissy mood ...

 

[TwinDegrees2]

I can give you an example of a gifted athlete without high IQ: Ex Bears QB Cade McNown.

A great athlete with gifted arm and physique, but with pea sized IQ for the game.

And another great example from Purdue, even with BonXXXXX1's attitude, is Jeff George: a cannon of arm for shooting down his own team, while blaming everything to others. Always me first..

No need for another one in this board..

Jay Edwards of former IU and Marion Giant fame comes to mind. And while there, how about former Marion Giant and Michigan State Zach Randolph

 

[BoilerAndy]

I can give you an example of a gifted athlete without high IQ: Ex Bears QB Cade McNown.

A great athlete with gifted arm and physique, but with pea sized IQ for the game.

And another great example from Purdue, even with BonXXXXX1's attitude, is Jeff George: a cannon of arm for shooting down his own team, while blaming everything to others. Always me first..

No need for another one in this board..

For basketball, anyone remember an off-the-charts athlete named Lawson?

 

[bonefish1]

Two thoughts:
1. It is a commonly used term, prevalent in most media when evaluating many players. It does have a meaning to those who use it. My opinion is that it is used for a player who has high anticipation, thus making him play "quicker" by anticipating what is going to happen and taking action based on that rather than waiting for it to start happening. Much of that is based on a deep understanding of the game, how it's played, and how certain players, including their teammates, play. I'm sure there is more complexity, but I like simple things.
2. If BB IQ is not important, then the best athletes don't need to waste their time watching film, only the less athletic players need to do that.

What I’m getting at, is you can have someone like Mathias, who I would probably guess is considered to have the highest BB IQ on the team and on a lot of teams. But again, regardless of how high his BB Iq is, he couldn’t get open or get his own shot in our last 2 tourny losses. (I’d have to look up how stats from those 2 losses but I believe they’re really bad). But, he’s a really, really good player.
So, what you have, is a really good shooter at 6’4 who also, presumably has a high B.B, but really struggles offensively against quicker, more athletic players.
I’d make the same argument with PJ, but he’s even more athletically challenged than DM.
The whole point of this is ideally, you have a great athlete who also has a high B.B. IQ although I’m starting to believe those might be mutually exclusive. But, if you had your choice, I’d prefer the better athlete over the higher B.B. iq.

 

[BoilerAndy]

The whole point of this is ideally, you have a great athlete who also has a high B.B. IQ although I’m starting to believe those might be mutually exclusive. But, if you had your choice, I’d prefer the better athlete over the higher B.B. iq.

So you'd prefer Lawson over Matthias? OK.

 

[bonefish1]

So you'd prefer Lawson over Matthias? OK.

I would say a really good comparison in terms of a similar bunt more athletic player would be AAMR from UM. 4 year player. Same size, same ranking in HS. AA was recruited by BC, PSU and other non-power high majors.

 

[PaBoiler78]

I would say a really good comparison in terms of a similar bunt more athletic player would be AAMR from UM. 4 year player. Same size, same ranking in HS. AA was recruited by BC, PSU and other non-power high majors.

it's MAAR, and when we were recruiting DM, we were also going after Macura, whom I wish we would have gotten.

 

[guppy likes purdue]

The reason why High BBIQ players are usually unathletic is because the poor poor athletes with poor IQ don't make college basketball teams

 

[BoilerAndy]

I would say a really good comparison in terms of a similar bunt more athletic player would be AAMR from UM. 4 year player. Same size, same ranking in HS. AA was recruited by BC, PSU and other non-power high majors.

Sorry, but you set the terms. I know who you would prefer. Athleticism over BBIQ. Period.

 

[StickPurdue]

What I’m getting at, is you can have someone like Mathias, who I would probably guess is considered to have the highest BB IQ on the team and on a lot of teams. But again, regardless of how high his BB Iq is, he couldn’t get open or get his own shot in our last 2 tourny losses. (I’d have to look up how stats from those 2 losses but I believe they’re really bad). But, he’s a really, really good player.
So, what you have, is a really good shooter at 6’4 who also, presumably has a high B.B, but really struggles offensively against quicker, more athletic players.
I’d make the same argument with PJ, but he’s even more athletically challenged than DM.
The whole point of this is ideally, you have a great athlete who also has a high B.B. IQ although I’m starting to believe those might be mutually exclusive. But, if you had your choice, I’d prefer the better athlete over the higher B.B. iq.

It's funny that of the two games you are referencing in one, they didn't have Haas or any inside presence. That is exactly what Haas did, teams had to worry about the inside. Nobody was getting clean looks for that very reason. It's why his injury was so devastating. Purdue is going to have to get something going inside next year or it will be even more frustrating. You are also ignoring that Mathis was one of the best defenders in the country, which you can't do being unathletic FYI.

And that Kansas team was pretty dang good too. They were able to deny the inside game and smother the shooters. It also was loaded with NBA talent and top recruits, so there is that.

 

[mathboy]

It's funny that of the two games you are referencing in one, they didn't have Haas or any inside presence. That is exactly what Haas did, teams had to worry about the inside. Nobody was getting clean looks for that very reason. It's why his injury was so devastating. Purdue is going to have to get something going inside next year or it will be even more frustrating. You are also ignoring that Mathis was one of the best defenders in the country, which you can't do being unathletic FYI.

And that Kansas team was pretty dang good too. They were able to deny the inside game and smother the shooters. It also was loaded with NBA talent and top recruits, so there is that.

Nice rational basketball knowledgeable response.

 

[bonefish1]

Sorry, but you set the terms. I know who you would prefer. Athleticism over BBIQ. Period.

Which would you prefer? Obviously, you want both, and I guess those guys are called 5 stars.

I'm very curious to know how many of you believe Carsen has a high BBIQ?

 

[bonefish1]

It's funny that of the two games you are referencing in one, they didn't have Haas or any inside presence. That is exactly what Haas did, teams had to worry about the inside. Nobody was getting clean looks for that very reason. It's why his injury was so devastating. Purdue is going to have to get something going inside next year or it will be even more frustrating. You are also ignoring that Mathis was one of the best defenders in the country, which you can't do being unathletic FYI.

And that Kansas team was pretty dang good too. They were able to deny the inside game and smother the shooters. It also was loaded with NBA talent and top recruits, so there is that.

1) Teams quit doubling Haas halfway through the B10 season which coincidentally and as expected, is when we saw our 3 pt shooting % drop. Otherwise known as an 'adjustment'. Teams were willing to let Haas get 25, but weren't going to let us hit 12 3's. I suspect TT would have played him the same way and while the game would have been closer, I still don't think we would have had a bunch of clean looks from 3.
Regarding your point about Kansas.....They're good? Duh....and water is wet.

So, what you're really saying, is that they had more talent than Purdue. More athletes that were quicker, faster and could out jump Purdue? In which case, it doesn't matter how high you BBIQ is if you can't get open, can't keep a guy in front of you, can't beat a guy to a spot.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

Nice rational basketball knowledgeable response.

Math, let's look at Dakota....athletic or high basketball IQ....or a bit of both.

He has decent speed...but really not quick enough to lead much of a fast break. He is somewhat athletic, but not a Vince or Carson athletic.

I think what makes Dakota so effective is he has an extremely high basketball IQ. He knows positioning on defense, I'm guessing that he watches as much film as he can. If you watch, he's around a lot of rebounds even if he doesn't get all of them. You can tell he's in the gym all of the time and that he's practiced shooting more than a lot of others....even with his bad game at the end. A true athlete would have been able to make TT's guards adjust their game...so, even with what quickness he has, and with the fair amount of athleticism he has, it's truly his basketball intelligence that makes him as good as he is.

 

[bonefish1]

Math, let's look at Dakota....athletic or high basketball IQ....or a bit of both.

He has decent speed...but really not quick enough to lead much of a fast break. He is somewhat athletic, but not a Vince or Carson athletic.

I think what makes Dakota so effective is he has an extremely high basketball IQ. He knows positioning on defense, I'm guessing that he watches as much film as he can. If you watch, he's around a lot of rebounds even if he doesn't get all of them. You can tell he's in the gym all of the time and that he's practiced shooting more than a lot of others....even with his bad game at the end. A true athlete would have been able to make TT's guards adjust their game...so, even with what quickness he has, and with the fair amount of athleticism he has, it's truly his basketball intelligence that makes him as good as he is.

I think DM is really good. I think he's a smart player, good shooter, good passer, but just an average athlete who struggles against similar sized guys who are better athletes.

But, I'll ask again. Who has the higher BB IQ? DM or Carsen?