2022/2023 Team Roster

Purdue Grad in Texas

All-American
Mar 22, 2010
28,815
39,603
113
What are those question marks that were answered?

🤦‍♂️ oh boy

Looks promising......

MrW5mUX.gif
 

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
But does that not raise some concern or questions? That the guy that largely started at the position for the better part of the past 3 years is suddenly not wanted back by the staff, at a/the time that there is a pretty glaring need at the position? Like say, it just does not make any sense...and, as such, is incredibly difficult to reconcile.
Raises a ton of question and concerns. Illustrates how little we actually know about what goes on behind the scenes as fans outside of the program. I think your view is that it raises concerns regarding the coaching staff, I'm more inclined to trust the coaching staff and say that it raises concern about the player and his willingness / eagerness last season and this to play the role needed by the team versus the role that he saw for himself headed into his junior year.
 

mathboy

All-American
Feb 4, 2004
10,717
10,684
113
Michigan
Raises a ton of question and concerns. Illustrates how little we actually know about what goes on behind the scenes as fans outside of the program. I think your view is that it raises concerns regarding the coaching staff, I'm more inclined to trust the coaching staff and say that it raises concern about the player and his willingness / eagerness last season and this to play the role needed by the team versus the role that he saw for himself headed into his junior year.
I think your theory merits consideration. Perhaps Hunter and our coaching staff had a difference in what they envisioned as his role next year. I also think that some of the guard talent coming off red shirts and coming into the program might (I say "might") have influenced his decision.

As for our guard situation, I think there has been a lot of needless hand wringing and concern expressed. My take is that we will be just fine at guard, good enough this year to compete for the BIG top three, and an easy NCAA bid.
 

DAG10

All-American
Nov 2, 2018
5,709
8,494
113
Raises a ton of question and concerns. Illustrates how little we actually know about what goes on behind the scenes as fans outside of the program. I think your view is that it raises concerns regarding the coaching staff, I'm more inclined to trust the coaching staff and say that it raises concern about the player and his willingness / eagerness last season and this to play the role needed by the team versus the role that he saw for himself headed into his junior year.
I would be more willing to buy into that, had I seen any real evidence of it last year...he played well enough (and so well actually) that the staff made the decision to go with him over Isaiah, despite the fact that Isaiah had not done anything wrong (he actually was near the top, if not at the top, in efficiency ratings nationally, and, it was not as if Purdue was struggling by any means with him in the lineup).

Like say, I am fine with the assertion, I just have a REALLY difficult time making any sense of it...again, he started for the better part of 3 years....that he suddenly was not what they needed is just crazy to me...more so in that they absolutely needed SOMEBODY with experience at the position...that they felt comfortable with no answer for a definite question...despite having one...it is definitely an indictment of someone....and, as much as I want to be with you on the matter, I just don't see how it is not on the staff...if he was not good enough now, how was he the answer last year? That team had a legitimate chance to compete for a National Championship and they were more than comfortable with him and Isaiah...evidenced by not pursuing anyone...then, when there is an actual need at the position, he no longer is good enough or the right guy for the part? It just does not add up.
 

DAG10

All-American
Nov 2, 2018
5,709
8,494
113
I think your theory merits consideration. Perhaps Hunter and our coaching staff had a difference in what they envisioned as his role next year. I also think that some of the guard talent coming off red shirts and coming into the program might (I say "might") have influenced his decision.

As for our guard situation, I think there has been a lot of needless hand wringing and concern expressed. My take is that we will be just fine at guard, good enough this year to compete for the BIG top three, and an easy NCAA bid.
There was no guard that redshirted...Kaufman-Renn and Waddell, yes? Neither of those guys are the answer in the backcourt.

The only reason they may be "good enough" is because they are so dominant and good up front that it can hide the deficiency there....and, if Newman happens to be even remotely good, that helps too...but, it is definitely more an unknown than a known at this point.
 

mathboy

All-American
Feb 4, 2004
10,717
10,684
113
Michigan
There was no guard that redshirted...Kaufman-Renn and Waddell, yes? Neither of those guys are the answer in the backcourt.

The only reason they may be "good enough" is because they are so dominant and good up front that it can hide the deficiency there....and, if Newman happens to be even remotely good, that helps too...but, it is definitely more an unknown than a known at this point.
Agree. I keep putting Waddell into the guard position like his father. He is listed as a forward so there’s that. I advance my thoughts about the sufficiency of our guards as only a theory to explain why Hunter left the program. It’s hard to understand why he would leave if he was really needed. Maybe it has more to do with him not wanting to play the point?
 

DAG10

All-American
Nov 2, 2018
5,709
8,494
113
Agree. I keep putting Waddell into the guard position like his father. He is listed as a forward so there’s that. I advance my thoughts about the sufficiency of our guards as only a theory to explain why Hunter left the program. It’s hard to understand why he would leave if he was really needed. Maybe it has more to do with him not wanting to play the point?
But those "new" guys weren't even there when he left, never mind...again, he started for the better part of three years...not like he was concerned about keeping the position as such.

Your next point sort of goes to my point...so, the idea that he was not needed is hard to understand, more so in that there clearly was a need (thus how they ended up with Jenkins).

And, your final point goes to my initial point about his not wanting to just throw post-entry passes all year.

The whole thing just seems very, very odd...I don't know how a guy that you tabbed as not just good enough, but, the best at the position and for the position...for multiple years and on a team that had a legitimate opportunity to contend/play for a National Championship, then, in a year where you have a need at the position and no genuine answers, you suddenly decide that he is no longer the best at/for the position...or program...like say, it just does not make sense or add up.

Posters were slammed a year ago for suggesting that Purdue should have at that time gone to the portal for an elite PG, but, Painter/staff did not bring in anyone, as, they were very content with team chemistry AND with personnel they said...repeatedly for that matter.

I can get had Isaiah returned them being ok with Hunter moving on, but, once Isaiah announced that he was leaving...with Purdue already looking for help at the position...once the ship sailed on Pack (and, I don't remember when it sailed on T. Hunter, but, he was a long shot at best anyway), it sure seemed like Hunter staying/coming back made sense at that point, in that he had decided to play his extra year. Like say, that he apparently was open to it, if not wanted to, but, the staff did not want him back just is very difficult to understand and hard to reconcile, and, even more so when they went out and got Jenkins instead essentially.
 

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
But those "new" guys weren't even there when he left, never mind...again, he started for the better part of three years...not like he was concerned about keeping the position as such.

Your next point sort of goes to my point...so, the idea that he was not needed is hard to understand, more so in that there clearly was a need (thus how they ended up with Jenkins).

And, your final point goes to my initial point about his not wanting to just throw post-entry passes all year.

The whole thing just seems very, very odd...I don't know how a guy that you tabbed as not just good enough, but, the best at the position and for the position...for multiple years and on a team that had a legitimate opportunity to contend/play for a National Championship, then, in a year where you have a need at the position and no genuine answers, you suddenly decide that he is no longer the best at/for the position...or program...like say, it just does not make sense or add up.

Posters were slammed a year ago for suggesting that Purdue should have at that time gone to the portal for an elite PG, but, Painter/staff did not bring in anyone, as, they were very content with team chemistry AND with personnel they said...repeatedly for that matter.

I can get had Isaiah returned them being ok with Hunter moving on, but, once Isaiah announced that he was leaving...with Purdue already looking for help at the position...once the ship sailed on Pack (and, I don't remember when it sailed on T. Hunter, but, he was a long shot at best anyway), it sure seemed like Hunter staying/coming back made sense at that point, in that he had decided to play his extra year. Like say, that he apparently was open to it, if not wanted to, but, the staff did not want him back just is very difficult to understand and hard to reconcile, and, even more so when they went out and got Jenkins instead essentially.
Do you see EHJ as a similar player to Jenkins, Pack, or Tyrese Hunter?
 

DAG10

All-American
Nov 2, 2018
5,709
8,494
113
Do you see EHJ as a similar player to Jenkins, Pack, or Tyrese Hunter?
Did I think Pack or Hunter were coming here to just feed the post the entire time? No.

Did I see the need for one of those guys (aside of Jenkins), absent Ivey, so as to provide somebody able to score? Yes.

Did Purdue need somebody with experience at the PG position given Isaiah transferring and Hunter graduating? Absolutely...would Hunter have addressed that? Yes. And, far more so than somebody from outside that is new to Purdue, new to the system (after multiple stops), and, who is not the defender that Hunter was either.

If the guy was good enough to be the starting PG on a team that had a legitimate chance to win a National Championship in the eyes of the staff...to the point that they were steadfast comfortable in going with him and not even considering adding someone at the position a year ago...after the guy had already been the starter for 2 years at the position...I simply can't understand how a year later, when there is a known need at the position (in part because of him graduating), that, somehow...Purdue's staff felt that the better option was an unknown on at least his third school, none at a legit basketball school or premier program...who has a lot of questions around him...and, who is not (and has not I don't believe) been a PG. Man, that is incredibly difficult to try to believe.
 

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
There was no guard that redshirted...Kaufman-Renn and Waddell, yes? Neither of those guys are the answer in the backcourt.

The only reason they may be "good enough" is because they are so dominant and good up front that it can hide the deficiency there....and, if Newman happens to be even remotely good, that helps too...but, it is definitely more an unknown than a known at this point.
I don’t know how anyone can say that the backcourt definitively or even likely won’t be ‘good enough’. On the flip side I agree 100% that it’s a huge unknown. Anyone who doesn’t have some level of concern about the backcourt just based on the number of new players and players in new roles doesn’t seem to me to be looking at this very realistically.
 

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
Did I think Pack or Hunter were coming here to just feed the post the entire time? No.

Did I see the need for one of those guys (aside of Jenkins), absent Ivey, so as to provide somebody able to score? Yes.

Did Purdue need somebody with experience at the PG position given Isaiah transferring and Hunter graduating? Absolutely...would Hunter have addressed that? Yes. And, far more so than somebody from outside that is new to Purdue, new to the system (after multiple stops), and, who is not the defender that Hunter was either.

If the guy was good enough to be the starting PG on a team that had a legitimate chance to win a National Championship in the eyes of the staff...to the point that they were steadfast comfortable in going with him and not even considering adding someone at the position a year ago...after the guy had already been the starter for 2 years at the position...I simply can't understand how a year later, when there is a known need at the position (in part because of him graduating), that, somehow...Purdue's staff felt that the better option was an unknown on at least his third school, none at a legit basketball school or premier program...who has a lot of questions around him...and, who is not (and has not I don't believe) been a PG. Man, that is incredibly difficult to try to believe.
I’m honestly not trying to convince you of anything because 1) I don’t care (no offense) 2) I think your mind is pretty made up.

I asked a super simple question, which I think you sort of answered, because to me the skill set that any of those three bring is very different to Eric. Whether you or I understand the full story of what happened with Eric (we don’t and can’t) or agree with the outcome is irrelevant. I can and have given my thoughts on why they may have wanted to go a different direction, none of which relate to Eric not being ‘good enough’ but my thoughts are pure speculation based on trying to read the tea leaves. I actually have no idea.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DAG10

bonefish1

All-American
Oct 4, 2004
14,799
13,996
113
I am stunned that you had/have not weighed in on Catchings yet...
Honestly, haven't really read up or watched any tape yet. If I'm not mistaken, he's about 6'6, thin, known at a shooter. Sounds similar to Kendall Stephens who transferred to Nevada a few years ago.
 

bonefish1

All-American
Oct 4, 2004
14,799
13,996
113
I think your theory merits consideration. Perhaps Hunter and our coaching staff had a difference in what they envisioned as his role next year. I also think that some of the guard talent coming off red shirts and coming into the program might (I say "might") have influenced his decision.

As for our guard situation, I think there has been a lot of needless hand wringing and concern expressed. My take is that we will be just fine at guard, good enough this year to compete for the BIG top three, and an easy NCAA bid.
I'd be curious to see where B10 coaches rated Purdue's backcourt in the league. My guess would be lower 1/2 to lower 1/3.
 

DAG10

All-American
Nov 2, 2018
5,709
8,494
113
Honestly, haven't really read up or watched any tape yet. If I'm not mistaken, he's about 6'6, thin, known at a shooter. Sounds similar to Kendall Stephens who transferred to Nevada a few years ago.
Better athlete/not the shooter (albeit a good shooter)...
 

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
Honestly, haven't really read up or watched any tape yet. If I'm not mistaken, he's about 6'6, thin, known at a shooter. Sounds similar to Kendall Stephens who transferred to Nevada a few years ago.
6'8", rail thin, nothing like Kendall Stephens
 
Last edited:

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
I'd be curious to see where B10 coaches rated Purdue's backcourt in the league. My guess would be lower 1/2 to lower 1/3.
I suspect you're spot on but not sure that means anything. They'll be seeing the same thing as anyone else, a bunch of new guys and guys in new roles. Doesn't mean that's where they'll end up.
 

Gemini95

Sophomore
Nov 15, 2012
1,518
2,460
113
Honestly, haven't really read up or watched any tape yet. If I'm not mistaken, he's about 6'6, thin, known at a shooter. Sounds similar to Kendall Stephens who transferred to Nevada a few years ago.
Good to see you're being open minded about it /s
 

mathboy

All-American
Feb 4, 2004
10,717
10,684
113
Michigan
I'd be curious to see where B10 coaches rated Purdue's backcourt in the league. My guess would be lower 1/2 to lower 1/3.
The better, more accurate question is where does Painter see his backcourt. …and that is my point. We fans haven’t seen the new/current back court and neither have the other BIG coaches. I’ll put m money on it surprising a good number of opponents. However, I do stand ready to eat my words.

I do think other BIG coaches think our front court is one of the best in the league.

:cool:
 

bonefish1

All-American
Oct 4, 2004
14,799
13,996
113
I suspect you're spot on but not sure that means anything. They'll be seeing the same thing as anyone else, a bunch of new guys and guys in new roles. Doesn't mean that's where they'll end up.
But, as an opposing coach, you know how you're going to defend Purdue: tight/in your face D on the guards, make them work to get around you, make entry passes to Edey difficult, guard the 3 pt line/close out hard because they're not going to be strong dribble penetration or finish at the rim.
 

bonefish1

All-American
Oct 4, 2004
14,799
13,996
113
The better, more accurate question is where does Painter see his backcourt. …and that is my point. We fans haven’t seen the new/current back court and neither have the other BIG coaches. I’ll put m money on it surprising a good number of opponents. However, I do stand ready to eat my words.

I do think other BIG coaches think our front court is one of the best in the league.

:cool:
we should be very solid in the front court, but the backcourt has a ton of questions marks.
There's no proven scorer at the guard position and it looks like we'll be relying on 2 true freshmen and a small school transfer to provide ball handling and some scoring punch.
 

PurdueDave

True Freshman
Jan 22, 2005
747
887
93
we should be very solid in the front court, but the backcourt has a ton of questions marks.
There's no proven scorer at the guard position and it looks like we'll be relying on 2 true freshmen and a small school transfer to provide ball handling and some scoring punch.
Right, but that doesn't mean they're bad. It just means we don't know. Let's wait until they play a few games before declaring them the worst back court in the big (maybe not you, but somebody on this board has declared them to be that bad).
 

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
But, as an opposing coach, you know how you're going to defend Purdue: tight/in your face D on the guards, make them work to get around you, make entry passes to Edey difficult, guard the 3 pt line/close out hard because they're not going to be strong dribble penetration or finish at the rim.
Totally agree. I commented elsewhere that it would be hugely impactful if some of our perimeter players can take advantage of hard close outs at the three point line to get past defenders and either draw a secondary defender or hit open 12 footers.

We're not going to have guards who can blow by defenders, but there are other ways to deal with pressure.
 

bonefish1

All-American
Oct 4, 2004
14,799
13,996
113
Right, but that doesn't mean they're bad. It just means we don't know. Let's wait until they play a few games before declaring them the worst back court in the big (maybe not you, but somebody on this board has declared them to be that bad).
I didn't say they were bad (yet). But, I do think it's fair to question Painters recruiting, especially in the biggest position of need.
 

bonefish1

All-American
Oct 4, 2004
14,799
13,996
113
Totally agree. I commented elsewhere that it would be hugely impactful if some of our perimeter players can take advantage of hard close outs at the three point line to get past defenders and either draw a secondary defender or hit open 12 footers.

We're not going to have guards who can blow by defenders, but there are other ways to deal with pressure.
That's a tough skill to develop if it's not already part of your game. I doubt we'll see that from Loyer. It's not really a big part of Newman or Morton's game, maybe a little.
I suspect Smith will find out early that he's not playing against high school players any longer when he does beat his defender and heads into the lane.
We'll probably have very good 3pt shooting, good post play but not much inbetween and not much in transition.
 

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
That's a tough skill to develop if it's not already part of your game. I doubt we'll see that from Loyer. It's not really a big part of Newman or Morton's game, maybe a little.
I suspect Smith will find out early that he's not playing against high school players any longer when he does beat his defender and heads into the lane.
We'll probably have very good 3pt shooting, good post play but not much inbetween and not much in transition.
I disagree on Loyer, he shot a ton of pull ups and floaters in high school and AAU. I've never seen Newman shoot a floater but he's frequently taken taken two dribbles in off of the three point line and shot a pull up, although I admittedly don't have stats on how effective he was. Morton is very inclined to put the ball on the floor, although he seems more inclined to look to pass than shoot up pull up or floater. Have seen film of Jenkins doing it a couple of times, doesn't seem to be a big part of his game.

Agree on Smith, I don't know if he has a floater or pull up game but he's going to have a lot more trouble finishing in traffic at this level.
 

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
I didn't say they were bad (yet). But, I do think it's fair to question Painters recruiting, especially in the biggest position of need.
I'm fascinated to see how things shake out in the backcourt. I can't remember the last time we lost so many minutes at the 1 through 3. Very different from the last time a big class graduated, where it was spread between the frontcourt (Haas and Vince) and the backcourt (PJ and Dakota) and we had Carsen and Cline returning.

Absolutely fair to question the recruiting, although to the poster's point above, I don't think it's fair to condemn the recruiting until we see how this plays out.
 

bonefish1

All-American
Oct 4, 2004
14,799
13,996
113
I'm fascinated to see how things shake out in the backcourt. I can't remember the last time we lost so many minutes at the 1 through 3. Very different from the last time a big class graduated, where it was spread between the frontcourt (Haas and Vince) and the backcourt (PJ and Dakota) and we had Carsen and Cline returning.

Absolutely fair to question the recruiting, although to the poster's point above, I don't think it's fair to condemn the recruiting until we see how this plays out.
Question, condemn, call it whatever, and again, I hope I'm 100% wrong and we're talking about Smith being the starting PG on a multiple FF team, but it raised a lot of eye brows when Painter offered an undersized, non-recruited PG when that was the biggest need.
 

arcb102000

All-American
Aug 27, 2006
7,441
2,632
113
Prior to the season and based upon the recent to fairly decent past, I know two things:

1. Indiana's preseason ranking and its final ranking will be very different and much lower; and
2. Purdue's preseason ranking will be lower and how they perform during the season will be better.

Painter has gotten results primarily because he adapts his season's strategy to his player's strengths. A criticism that can be made is that he is slower to subsequently adjust it during the season, especially when facing injuries, etc.

Based upon the record, I expect Purdue to be a very competitive team in the B1G this year. We'll see how it turns out.
 

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
Question, condemn, call it whatever, and again, I hope I'm 100% wrong and we're talking about Smith being the starting PG on a multiple FF team, but it raised a lot of eye brows when Painter offered an undersized, non-recruited PG when that was the biggest need.
You may be completely right, I have no idea. I do know that Painter rarely gets the evaluation of guys who are on his 'A' list wrong and the only PG that the staff likely had rated higher than Smith was the Thornton kid who ended up at OSU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schnelk and mathboy

thadoc

All-American
Aug 19, 2001
15,475
7,334
113
Question, condemn, call it whatever, and again, I hope I'm 100% wrong and we're talking about Smith being the starting PG on a multiple FF team, but it raised a lot of eye brows when Painter offered an undersized, non-recruited PG when that was the biggest need.
Never mind that undersized, non-recruited pg won Mr basketball and knocked out the defending champs in sectionals....recruiting rankings are a joke if you're outside the top 10 or so players....smith was a huge get and we were lucky he committed when he did or else his offers would've been a mile long.....
 

mathboy

All-American
Feb 4, 2004
10,717
10,684
113
Michigan
Never mind that undersized, non-recruited pg won Mr basketball and knocked out the defending champs in sectionals....recruiting rankings are a joke if you're outside the top 10 or so players....smith was a huge get and we were lucky he committed when he did or else his offers would've been a mile long.....
I think Smith had interest from Gonzaga and Villanova, but committed to Purdue before those schools could offer. Of course, we don’t know that those schools would have actually offered, but we don’t know that they wouldn’t either. One might think that his stats and his leadership, demonstrated on the court would indicate those offers would be forthcoming.
 

bonefish1

All-American
Oct 4, 2004
14,799
13,996
113
Never mind that undersized, non-recruited pg won Mr basketball and knocked out the defending champs in sectionals....recruiting rankings are a joke if you're outside the top 10 or so players....smith was a huge get and we were lucky he committed when he did or else his offers would've been a mile long.....
Didn't another Indiana Mr. Basketball end up playing at Stetson or some school in FL no one's ever heard of?

i wouldn't say recruiting rankings are a joke. They're not perfect, but due to the law of large numbers, they get it right more often than wrong. I think you'll also notice a pretty strong correlation over time between recruiting rankings and a teams success in the tourney. Sure, there'll be some outliers, but in general, the better teams get the better recruits.
 

boilerball2021

Redshirt Freshman
Jul 29, 2021
1,433
894
113
I think Smith had interest from Gonzaga and Villanova, but committed to Purdue before those schools could offer. Of course, we don’t know that those schools would have actually offered, but we don’t know that they wouldn’t either. One might think that his stats and his leadership, demonstrated on the court would indicate those offers would be forthcoming.
That's a bit of a stretch. I think Smith will be good for us in time, but he isn't a Gonzaga or Nova type recruit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: johnboiler123

boilerball2021

Redshirt Freshman
Jul 29, 2021
1,433
894
113
Didn't another Indiana Mr. Basketball end up playing at Stetson or some school in FL no one's ever heard of?

i wouldn't say recruiting rankings are a joke. They're not perfect, but due to the law of large numbers, they get it right more often than wrong. I think you'll also notice a pretty strong correlation over time between recruiting rankings and a teams success in the tourney. Sure, there'll be some outliers, but in general, the better teams get the better recruits.
I believe you are talking about Luke Brown who didn't win Mr. basketball.
 

northside100

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 11, 2001
5,019
4,128
113
Didn't another Indiana Mr. Basketball end up playing at Stetson or some school in FL no one's ever heard of?

i wouldn't say recruiting rankings are a joke. They're not perfect, but due to the law of large numbers, they get it right more often than wrong. I think you'll also notice a pretty strong correlation over time between recruiting rankings and a teams success in the tourney. Sure, there'll be some outliers, but in general, the better teams get the better recruits.
Carsen Edwards - 118
Jaden Ivey - 89
Zach Edey - 440
Vince Edwards - 121
Trevion Williams - 154
Dakota Mathias - 218

You're making general statements about the value of recruiting ratings and you're not wrong. I don't care about 'on average' nationally because it's not relevant. What is relevant is Painter's track record on scouting and developing guys he has on his 'A' list, regardless of their recruiting ranking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Monk1014

johnboiler123

True Freshman
Jul 23, 2020
731
934
93
Carsen Edwards - 118
Jaden Ivey - 89
Zach Edey - 440
Vince Edwards - 121
Trevion Williams - 154
Dakota Mathias - 218

You're making general statements about the value of recruiting ratings and you're not wrong. I don't care about 'on average' nationally because it's not relevant. What is relevant is Painter's track record on scouting and developing guys he has on his 'A' list, regardless of their recruiting ranking.
Now, compare their offer lists with smith.
 

Latest posts