I think that the point is that attrition is the norm in college basketball.Saying we've had attrition is hyperbole? We already knew not to take you seriously, but now we know you are in full denial.
I think that the point is that attrition is the norm in college basketball.Saying we've had attrition is hyperbole? We already knew not to take you seriously, but now we know you are in full denial.
You're missing the point. IF the 2017 class ends up being all non top 100 players, past history shows us that the majority of those players will be busts, like Weatherford, Hale, Lawson, etc etc. Top 100 players, like AJH, have a much better chance at developing into all B1G players. If you can't grasp that correlation, then you probably aren't a Purdue grad.Neither is Weatherford. But I do love how now you guys are blaming Painter for players that transfer and don't develop or never even set foot on campus to begin with. But yet, he gets no credit for any player improvement whatsoever.
You're missing the point. IF the 2017 class ends up being all non top 100 players, past history shows us that the majority of those players will be busts, like Weatherford, Hale, Lawson, etc etc. Top 100 players, like AJH, have a much better chance at developing into all B1G players. If you can't grasp that correlation, then you probably aren't a Purdue grad.
I'm still holding out hope we get some top 100 players on this class, lot of time left.
Deleted my post because you hit it right on the head.PJ, Mathias, and JT are outside the top 200. PJ and JT were almost outside the top 300. Cline and Vince were outside the top 100. Bryson Scott, Kendall Stephens, and Ronnie Johnson were all top 100 guys. It is more about fitting the system. If Painter can land Eastern, Wheeler, and Manley to go with Haarms that would be a really nice class. I know we expected/wanted more, but if we can land those four players it will keep us competitive. I would be happy with landing at least two out of the Easten, Wheeler, and Manley with preference on Eastern.
You have a point, but your crossover boundary is too low. I would have said top 200 player is the crude boundary for those players more likely to succeed.You're missing the point. IF the 2017 class ends up being all non top 100 players, past history shows us that the majority of those players will be busts, like Weatherford, Hale, Lawson, etc etc. Top 100 players, like AJH, have a much better chance at developing into all B1G players. If you can't grasp that correlation, then you probably aren't a Purdue grad.
I'm still holding out hope we get some top 100 players on this class, lot of time left.
Looking at last years team:PJ, Mathias, and JT are outside the top 200. PJ and JT were almost outside the top 300. Cline and Vince were outside the top 100. Bryson Scott, Kendall Stephens, and Ronnie Johnson were all top 100 guys. It is more about fitting the system. If Painter can land Eastern, Wheeler, and Manley to go with Haarms that would be a really nice class. I know we expected/wanted more, but if we can land those four players it will keep us competitive. I would be happy with landing at least two out of the Easten, Wheeler, and Manley with preference on Eastern.
I would revise it to 150.You have a point, but your crossover boundary is too low. I would have said top 200 player is the crude boundary for those players more likely to succeed.
Waving around Weatherford, Hale or Lawson is a mixed bag, because all 3 of them were head cases. They had many of the physical tools to eventually succeed, but all of them were victims of their own attitude, or lacked the willingness to work at their game. I guess you could say Painter should have known these kids were head cases, but I think he took a chance.
There are plenty of stories about kids that were unrated or lowly rated that put in the work to get better. We have had a few of those too.
makes sense to me. Let's use the marker at 150 to determine if the kid will succeed (Did that sound a little sarcastic?). No really, top 150 kids do tend to succeed at D1 basketball than 150+ kids. No doubt.I would revise it to 150.
Yep. kids in the 100-150 range generally are contributors, but not difference makers.makes sense to me. Let's use the marker at 150 to determine if the kid will succeed (Did that sound a little sarcastic?). No really, top 150 kids do tend to succeed at D1 basketball than 150+ kids. No doubt.
The issue I have is that we need higher ranked kids. Top 150 kids play well enough to get us to the NCAA's, but they are the players that miss that end-of-game shot that wins the sweet sixteen game. You need a top 50 kid for that kind of success.
When Painter can bring in the right kids, he does very well developing them.Yep. kids in the 100-150 range generally are contributors, but not difference makers.
Painter has recruited 4 All Big Ten players. All were top 100 players.
JT was and still is a project. He has not played 1 minute of game where it mattered.PJ, Mathias, and JT are outside the top 200. PJ and JT were almost outside the top 300. Cline and Vince were outside the top 100. Bryson Scott, Kendall Stephens, and Ronnie Johnson were all top 100 guys. It is more about fitting the system. If Painter can land Eastern, Wheeler, and Manley to go with Haarms that would be a really nice class. I know we expected/wanted more, but if we can land those four players it will keep us competitive. I would be happy with landing at least two out of the Easten, Wheeler, and Manley with preference on Eastern.
Well...we struggle to fill a full team because of attrition. Need walkons just to hold a practice. Spent two years on the 2017 class. All the big boys to this point have said no. Our lone commit was recruited for what seems like a week or two. Same with Wheeler. Good chance both will be considered projects/unranked.I think that the point is that attrition is the norm in college basketball.
You are officially the king of hyperbole.Well...we struggle to fill a full team because of attrition. Need walkons just to hold a practice. Spent two years on the 2017 class. All the big boys to this point have said no. Our lone commit was recruited for what seems like a week or two. Same with Wheeler. Good chance both will be considered projects/unranked.
You are the king of overhyping projects.You are officially the king of hyperbole.
That is rich since I haven't done that where you have done nothing but spew over exaggerations.You are the king of overhyping projects.
PJ, Mathias, and JT are outside the top 200. PJ and JT were almost outside the top 300. Cline and Vince were outside the top 100. Bryson Scott, Kendall Stephens, and Ronnie Johnson were all top 100 guys. It is more about fitting the system. If Painter can land Eastern, Wheeler, and Manley to go with Haarms that would be a really nice class. I know we expected/wanted more, but if we can land those four players it will keep us competitive. I would be happy with landing at least two out of the Easten, Wheeler, and Manley with preference on Eastern.
Maybe I can add something here to help with the understanding of the situation. Hale and Lawson, and Weatherford too, were not kids we would want on the team. They did not work hard. they did put forth the effort to match the effort others were expending. When that happens, and the coach lets it go, all the players begin to think "why should I work so hard when these guys aren't?".Well...we struggle to fill a full team because of attrition. Need walkons just to hold a practice. Spent two years on the 2017 class. All the big boys to this point have said no. Our lone commit was recruited for what seems like a week or two. Same with Wheeler. Good chance both will be considered projects/unranked.
That lack of work ethic is a good chunk of the reason they were never highly ranked- goes hand in hand.Maybe I can add something here to help with the understanding of the situation. Hale and Lawson, and Weatherford too, were not kids we would want on the team. They did not work hard. they did put forth the effort to match the effort others were expending. When that happens, and the coach lets it go, all the players begin to think "why should I work so hard when these guys aren't?".
That is the last thing you want to happen on the team. It is a cancer - you can see the same thing at work. I have been part of some high performance teams, and the last thing any of us wanted was a slacker. We bounced them out asap. I would rather be short handed than deal with a slacker on the team. I can see Painter doing the same. Lawson and Hale had to go. We didn't need them to practice against. Weatherford, IIRC, was running his own game in his mind, and was trying to do the Ronnie Johnson thing. Again, had to change or move on.
There's no magical cutoff line. Like any distribution, the drop-off gets more gradual the deeper you go.I would revise it to 150.
Saying we've had attrition is hyperbole? We already knew not to take you seriously, but now we know you are in full denial.
You've got to read better or I've got to write better. Sorry if you misunderstood my point. Hale & Lawson did not work at their game. Weatherford was a different animal. Here is my statement about him: "Weatherford, IIRC, was running his own game in his mind, and was trying to do the Ronnie Johnson thing. Again, had to change or move on". Maybe I should have started a new paragraph for that statement to separate the two issues. Also, it is just my observation and might not be 100% accurate.re: weatherford
what happened to him after coming to purdue, that his work ethic declined?
when he committed, i thought it was the exact opposite.
cline said
"He's going to bring a guy that just loves to win. He's a guy that will come every day and work his butt off. He's a guy that competes."
I think you are overstating the issues and denying the positives, just to paint a black picture. I am not sure why you would want to do this, except to annoy those of us who are very excited about this year's team.Well...we struggle to fill a full team because of attrition. Need walkons just to hold a practice. Spent two years on the 2017 class. All the big boys to this point have said no. Our lone commit was recruited for what seems like a week or two. Same with Wheeler. Good chance both will be considered projects/unranked.
Painter's reaches have been when he offers kids after a very short period of recruitment. Lawson, Hart, Weatherford, and Haarms just to name a few. These usually follow a string of bad luck with Tier 1 and Tier 2 candidates. We'll have to beat off some good teams with a stick to get Sasha.I think you are overstating the issues and denying the positives, just to paint a black picture. I am not sure why you would want to do this, except to annoy those of us who are very excited about this year's team.
First, the attrition has been fairly normal for most D1 teams. The one kid that quit recently regretted his decision immediately. We have good team chemistry and good players. No real issue there.
Second, you have no idea how long some of these kids have been recruited by Painter and his staff. They may have been building the relationships for several years with many of these kids. Fact: the staff will offer the highest rated players first. Based on the outcome of those offers, they will move on to the next level of kids.
It is true that a surprise visit from Izzo the night he was inducted into the HOF, along with several tears persuaded our top recruit (JJJ) to go to MSU. Tillman's girlfriend already is going to MSU, and he is a Michigan kid. It happens. We move on. There are many great players from 2017 uncommitted. The game isn't over yet, so please don't piss your pants yet. However, if you feel the need to do it anyway, I recommend doing it less publically than here. It's embarrassing.
"Hale and Lawson, and Weatherford too, were not kids we would want on the team.They did not work hard."You've got to read better or I've got to write better. Sorry if you misunderstood my point. Hale & Lawson did not work at their game. Weatherford was a different animal. Here is my statement about him: "Weatherford, IIRC, was running his own game in his mind, and was trying to do the Ronnie Johnson thing. Again, had to change or move on". Maybe I should have started a new paragraph for that statement to separate the two issues. Also, it is just my observation and might not be 100% accurate.
chalk it up to my poor sentence construction. My Bad."Hale and Lawson, and Weatherford too, were not kids we would want on the team.They did not work hard."
Ya I was just going by this first statement,
Thought it was in addition to the second
He has committed as of this morning!
His CURRENT ranking may be low, but coaches are starting to see something in him. He has had visits the past week from Arkansas, Boston College and Virginia. Kansas was looking at him last year and has also garnered interest form ND, Syracuse, Texas, Villanova, and Xavier in the past. I think there is potential there. Lets not judge or trash kids due to a number....
Just like Vince.Purdue swooped in at the right time, and he will outplay his ranking IMO.
Just like Vince.
Aaron Wheeler's current ranking on 247 Sports has been recently updated to No. 123 in Class of 2017 and 26th best SF. Purdue swooped in at the right time, and he will outplay his ranking IMO.
He must like Painter's robotic approach. LOL.Forgive my lack of tech savvy.....
__________________________________
https://twitter.com/_AaronWheeler_
Very excited to announce my commitment to Purdue University to continue my athletic and academic career #BoilerUp