Athletic forwards - an analysis

[FirstDownB]

Out of curiosity and discussions of ‘fit’ and ‘style’ I went back over the Purdue forwards/bigs of the past 10 years and attempted to group them in like categories, based on physical abilities and stature. We are excluding guards and wings here.

Stretch forward- You know the type. The Robbie Hummel mold. Can handle the ball, shoot, do things that guards typically do but in a 6’7”+ frame.

Vincent Edwards
Trey Kaufman*

Athletic forward- Guys generally 6’8” and above who are relatively thin and can jump out of the gym. They possess other skills and abilities, but it is their natural athletic ability that presents the potential.

Jacob Lawson
Jacquil Taylor
Eden Ewing
Aaron Wheeler
Emmanuel Dowuona

Hulking forward- The ones who typically end up at center. Big strong frames, 6’9”+ 250+, with enough athleticism to cause matchup problems.

Caleb Swanigan
Trevion Williams
Caleb Furst*

The Scrapper- They don’t stand out for their size or athletic prowess and don’t possess the ball skills or quickness of a stretch forward.

Grady Eifert
Mason Gillis

Aircraft carrier- There is really only one position for these guys, the 7’+ club. They stand above the rest breathing the clear air at the top of the gym.

AJ Hammons
Isaac Haas
Matt Haarms
Zach Edey

What strikes me most is the success rate at Purdue of the players within each category. You might argue mis-categorization of one or two guys, and I may have missed one or two more, but there seems to be a fairly strong trend here.

Is an ‘athletic forward’ a bad fit for the system, is it a development issue, or is it just plain bad luck?

Is this enough of a trend to cause a shift in recruiting philosophy? Judging from the last couple recruiting classes, perhaps it already has.

 

[mathboy]

What you are saying is that Matt Painter makes very good use of the talent he gets regardless of type. Right?

 

[Poprudy]

Out of curiosity and discussions of ‘fit’ and ‘style’ I went back over the Purdue forwards/bigs of the past 10 years and attempted to group them in like categories, based on physical abilities and stature. We are excluding guards and wings here.

Stretch forward- You know the type. The Robbie Hummel mold. Can handle the ball, shoot, do things that guards typically do but in a 6’7”+ frame.

Vincent Edwards
Trey Kaufman*

Athletic forward- Guys generally 6’8” and above who are relatively thin and can jump out of the gym. They possess other skills and abilities, but it is their natural athletic ability that presents the potential.

Jacob Lawson
Jacquil Taylor
Eden Ewing
Aaron Wheeler
Emmanuel Dowuona

Hulking forward- The ones who typically end up at center. Big strong frames, 6’9”+ 250+, with enough athleticism to cause matchup problems.

Caleb Swanigan
Trevion Williams
Caleb Furst*

The Scrapper- They don’t stand out for their size or athletic prowess and don’t possess the ball skills or quickness of a stretch forward.

Grady Eifert
Mason Gillis

Aircraft carrier- There is really only one position for these guys, the 7’+ club. They stand above the rest breathing the clear air at the top of the gym.

AJ Hammons
Isaac Haas
Matt Haarms
Zach Edey

What strikes me most is the success rate at Purdue of the players within each category. You might argue mis-categorization of one or two guys, and I may have missed one or two more, but there seems to be a fairly strong trend here.

Is an ‘athletic forward’ a bad fit for the system, is it a development issue, or is it just plain bad luck?

Is this enough of a trend to cause a shift in recruiting philosophy? Judging from the last couple recruiting classes, perhaps it already has.

I can't remember ever having a player like Ivey, All B1G player like Williams and bringing in a potential FPOY in Trey. Having 3 levels of scoring makes us a very dangerous team along with a bench that has played significant minutes.

 

[Indy_Rider]

The pure athletic forward is a bad fit for any system, especially if they can't handle the ball. But you take a flyer on them with the hope they can develop the handle and be a stretch/slasher. When they do, they are very special.

 

[FirstDownB]

The pure athletic forward is a bad fit for any system, especially if they can't handle the ball. But you take a flyer on them with the hope they can develop the handle and be a stretch/slasher. When they do, they are very special.

I think your point is that the athletic forward, in order to excel, has to also have a certain level of skill regardless of what system he plays in. I agree. However when those minimum skills do not develop maybe there is less latitude, less of a plan B, within this particular system for the athletic forward than with the other categories.

 

[BoilerDeac]

All I know is I don’t want I hear any excuses next year about youth or some other reason as to why Purdue can’t or doesn’t make a run.

Next year the expectations are sky high, as they should be!

 

[njm8845]

Out of curiosity and discussions of ‘fit’ and ‘style’ I went back over the Purdue forwards/bigs of the past 10 years and attempted to group them in like categories, based on physical abilities and stature. We are excluding guards and wings here.

Stretch forward- You know the type. The Robbie Hummel mold. Can handle the ball, shoot, do things that guards typically do but in a 6’7”+ frame.

Vincent Edwards
Trey Kaufman*

Athletic forward- Guys generally 6’8” and above who are relatively thin and can jump out of the gym. They possess other skills and abilities, but it is their natural athletic ability that presents the potential.

Jacob Lawson
Jacquil Taylor
Eden Ewing
Aaron Wheeler
Emmanuel Dowuona

Hulking forward- The ones who typically end up at center. Big strong frames, 6’9”+ 250+, with enough athleticism to cause matchup problems.

Caleb Swanigan
Trevion Williams
Caleb Furst*

The Scrapper- They don’t stand out for their size or athletic prowess and don’t possess the ball skills or quickness of a stretch forward.

Grady Eifert
Mason Gillis

Aircraft carrier- There is really only one position for these guys, the 7’+ club. They stand above the rest breathing the clear air at the top of the gym.

AJ Hammons
Isaac Haas
Matt Haarms
Zach Edey

What strikes me most is the success rate at Purdue of the players within each category. You might argue mis-categorization of one or two guys, and I may have missed one or two more, but there seems to be a fairly strong trend here.

Is an ‘athletic forward’ a bad fit for the system, is it a development issue, or is it just plain bad luck?

Is this enough of a trend to cause a shift in recruiting philosophy? Judging from the last couple recruiting classes, perhaps it already has.

I think the problem with this analysis is that it’s done retrospectively. In other words, you’ve grouped them by their production. In which case it seems obvious that Wheeler or Taylor weren’t going to work... they didn’t have much skill!

But coming into the program, what were the differences between Vince and Wheeler?

I think you still take a 6’-8” guy who can jump out of the gym and allegedly shoot any day of the week.

Sometimes guys oozing with potential turn it into production. JJ is the best example of this. I think people forget how raw he was as a freshman. Tre is another example.

 

[purduepat1969]

Out of curiosity and discussions of ‘fit’ and ‘style’ I went back over the Purdue forwards/bigs of the past 10 years and attempted to group them in like categories, based on physical abilities and stature. We are excluding guards and wings here.

Stretch forward- You know the type. The Robbie Hummel mold. Can handle the ball, shoot, do things that guards typically do but in a 6’7”+ frame.

Vincent Edwards
Trey Kaufman*

Athletic forward- Guys generally 6’8” and above who are relatively thin and can jump out of the gym. They possess other skills and abilities, but it is their natural athletic ability that presents the potential.

Jacob Lawson
Jacquil Taylor
Eden Ewing
Aaron Wheeler
Emmanuel Dowuona

Hulking forward- The ones who typically end up at center. Big strong frames, 6’9”+ 250+, with enough athleticism to cause matchup problems.

Caleb Swanigan
Trevion Williams
Caleb Furst*

The Scrapper- They don’t stand out for their size or athletic prowess and don’t possess the ball skills or quickness of a stretch forward.

Grady Eifert
Mason Gillis

Aircraft carrier- There is really only one position for these guys, the 7’+ club. They stand above the rest breathing the clear air at the top of the gym.

AJ Hammons
Isaac Haas
Matt Haarms
Zach Edey

What strikes me most is the success rate at Purdue of the players within each category. You might argue mis-categorization of one or two guys, and I may have missed one or two more, but there seems to be a fairly strong trend here.

Is an ‘athletic forward’ a bad fit for the system, is it a development issue, or is it just plain bad luck?

Is this enough of a trend to cause a shift in recruiting philosophy? Judging from the last couple recruiting classes, perhaps it already has.

Basil Smotherman - Athletic Forward
Travis Carroll - Scrapper? or Hulking forward?
Sandy Marcius - Hulking forward
Donnie Hale - Scrapper?
Jay Simpson - Hulking forward

In my opinion, we haven't had enough of the stretch forward, which to me is key to the type of offense Painter wants to play by pushing it into the post. Your opponent can't double your big man with their other forward if they have to worry about your stretch forward either shooting from 15+ feet, or driving to the basket.

 

[Poprudy]

Basil Smotherman - Athletic Forward
Travis Carroll - Scrapper? or Hulking forward?
Sandy Marcius - Hulking forward
Donnie Hale - Scrapper?
Jay Simpson - Hulking forward

In my opinion, we haven't had enough of the stretch forward, which to me is key to the type of offense Painter wants to play by pushing it into the post. Your opponent can't double your big man with their other forward if they have to worry about your stretch forward either shooting from 15+ feet, or driving to the basket.

Scoring at every level is going to be huge for us. Having athletes that can score at ease. This team reminds me of the 3 amigos. I don't like comparing but the potential is that high. IMO

 

[TwinDegrees2]

Basil Smotherman - Athletic Forward
Travis Carroll - Scrapper? or Hulking forward?
Sandy Marcius - Hulking forward
Donnie Hale - Scrapper?
Jay Simpson - Hulking forward

In my opinion, we haven't had enough of the stretch forward, which to me is key to the type of offense Painter wants to play by pushing it into the post. Your opponent can't double your big man with their other forward if they have to worry about your stretch forward either shooting from 15+ feet, or driving to the basket.

Being a former IU guy and a fan of Coach Knight, I know that before he was let go by IU, he had spoken about a concept where he wanted a team of players 6'5" to 6-8" who could play any position. No super bigs, no little guards....a team of players who were great athletes who could shoot, rebound and play defense. I still think that is an interesting concept.

 

[ehuffma1]

Out of curiosity and discussions of ‘fit’ and ‘style’ I went back over the Purdue forwards/bigs of the past 10 years and attempted to group them in like categories, based on physical abilities and stature. We are excluding guards and wings here.

Stretch forward- You know the type. The Robbie Hummel mold. Can handle the ball, shoot, do things that guards typically do but in a 6’7”+ frame.

Vincent Edwards
Trey Kaufman*

Athletic forward- Guys generally 6’8” and above who are relatively thin and can jump out of the gym. They possess other skills and abilities, but it is their natural athletic ability that presents the potential.

Jacob Lawson
Jacquil Taylor
Eden Ewing
Aaron Wheeler
Emmanuel Dowuona

Hulking forward- The ones who typically end up at center. Big strong frames, 6’9”+ 250+, with enough athleticism to cause matchup problems.

Caleb Swanigan
Trevion Williams
Caleb Furst*

The Scrapper- They don’t stand out for their size or athletic prowess and don’t possess the ball skills or quickness of a stretch forward.

Grady Eifert
Mason Gillis

Aircraft carrier- There is really only one position for these guys, the 7’+ club. They stand above the rest breathing the clear air at the top of the gym.

AJ Hammons
Isaac Haas
Matt Haarms
Zach Edey

What strikes me most is the success rate at Purdue of the players within each category. You might argue mis-categorization of one or two guys, and I may have missed one or two more, but there seems to be a fairly strong trend here.

Is an ‘athletic forward’ a bad fit for the system, is it a development issue, or is it just plain bad luck?

Is this enough of a trend to cause a shift in recruiting philosophy? Judging from the last couple recruiting classes, perhaps it already has.

I like the analysis! CMP has done a lot with different types of players and had success. I think it’s good to have a variety of types of guys to utilize. I like the mix of players on the roster for the upcoming season.

It’s wise of Painter to utilize a variety of types of players, so that when recruiting you can have tape on a guy that might look like him. Showing you’ve had that type of success and the strategies you use to get them the ball would show the kid you know what you’re doing.

The roster for the next 3 years is pretty much loaded. I could see us spending almost the whole next 3 years in the top 25 and if things get rolling, in the top 10.

 

[FirstDownB]

I think the problem with this analysis is that it’s done retrospectively. In other words, you’ve grouped them by their production. In which case it seems obvious that Wheeler or Taylor weren’t going to work... they didn’t have much skill!

But coming into the program, what were the differences between Vince and Wheeler?

I think you still take a 6’-8” guy who can jump out of the gym and allegedly shoot any day of the week.

Sometimes guys oozing with potential turn it into production. JJ is the best example of this. I think people forget how raw he was as a freshman. Tre is another example.

Edwards had ball skills that Wheeler didn’t coming out of HS

 

[ehuffma1]

Being a former IU guy and a fan of Coach Knight, I know that before he was let go by IU, he had spoken about a concept where he wanted a team of players 6'5" to 6-8" who could play any position. No super bigs, no little guards....a team of players who were great athletes who could shoot, rebound and play defense. I still think that is an interesting concept.

I think CMP has built his team’s uniquely but a bit like Virginia. Defense is always emphasized once he gets the players. I really think he’s recruiting for offense the last few years. I think he liked the look of his teams when they were scoring at will.

The concept you were talking about is interesting and can work to a certain degree. At Purdue we’ve tended to try to be a disciplined, high IQ team that can shoot. Somehow that’s in the DNA. I do think we need a few ultra athletic guys to create matchups and create his own shot.

 

[purduepat1969]

I think the problem with this analysis is that it’s done retrospectively. In other words, you’ve grouped them by their production. In which case it seems obvious that Wheeler or Taylor weren’t going to work... they didn’t have much skill!

But coming into the program, what were the differences between Vince and Wheeler?

I think you still take a 6’-8” guy who can jump out of the gym and allegedly shoot any day of the week.

Sometimes guys oozing with potential turn it into production. JJ is the best example of this. I think people forget how raw he was as a freshman. Tre is another example.

Vince Edwards was a 4 star recruit coming out of high school who could handle the ball, shoot, and pretty much do everything. Wheeler was not. Painter saw the "potential" in Wheeler, but Wheeler never developed.

 

[CWS]

I think when you categorize them as “athletic” you are placing them there because they can’t shoot. Perhaps you have divided them by “have a good outside shot” and “don’t have good outside shot”. When picking teams, I’ll pick from the “have a good outside shot” all day. The 5 position is different, but I think we can all agree that 1-4 all need a good outside shot in today’s game and our offense. They don’t have to be monster scorers, just enough to keep them honest (PJ vs Eastern).

 

[New Pal Boiler]

But coming into the program, what were the differences between Vince and Wheeler?

Vince was more skilled as a high school junior than Wheeler is now.

 

[hoosierdog1]

Out of curiosity and discussions of ‘fit’ and ‘style’ I went back over the Purdue forwards/bigs of the past 10 years and attempted to group them in like categories, based on physical abilities and stature. We are excluding guards and wings here.

Stretch forward- You know the type. The Robbie Hummel mold. Can handle the ball, shoot, do things that guards typically do but in a 6’7”+ frame.

Vincent Edwards
Trey Kaufman*

Athletic forward- Guys generally 6’8” and above who are relatively thin and can jump out of the gym. They possess other skills and abilities, but it is their natural athletic ability that presents the potential.

Jacob Lawson
Jacquil Taylor
Eden Ewing
Aaron Wheeler
Emmanuel Dowuona

Hulking forward- The ones who typically end up at center. Big strong frames, 6’9”+ 250+, with enough athleticism to cause matchup problems.

Caleb Swanigan
Trevion Williams
Caleb Furst*

The Scrapper- They don’t stand out for their size or athletic prowess and don’t possess the ball skills or quickness of a stretch forward.

Grady Eifert
Mason Gillis

Aircraft carrier- There is really only one position for these guys, the 7’+ club. They stand above the rest breathing the clear air at the top of the gym.

AJ Hammons
Isaac Haas
Matt Haarms
Zach Edey

What strikes me most is the success rate at Purdue of the players within each category. You might argue mis-categorization of one or two guys, and I may have missed one or two more, but there seems to be a fairly strong trend here.

Is an ‘athletic forward’ a bad fit for the system, is it a development issue, or is it just plain bad luck?

Is this enough of a trend to cause a shift in recruiting philosophy? Judging from the last couple recruiting classes, perhaps it already has.

Well the athletic forward type guys you mentioned sure the hell didn't work out for us! Another note TKR is supposed to be 6'9

 

[chaspark]

Out of curiosity and discussions of ‘fit’ and ‘style’ I went back over the Purdue forwards/bigs of the past 10 years and attempted to group them in like categories, based on physical abilities and stature. We are excluding guards and wings here.

Stretch forward- You know the type. The Robbie Hummel mold. Can handle the ball, shoot, do things that guards typically do but in a 6’7”+ frame.

Vincent Edwards
Trey Kaufman*

Athletic forward- Guys generally 6’8” and above who are relatively thin and can jump out of the gym. They possess other skills and abilities, but it is their natural athletic ability that presents the potential.

Jacob Lawson
Jacquil Taylor
Eden Ewing
Aaron Wheeler
Emmanuel Dowuona

Hulking forward- The ones who typically end up at center. Big strong frames, 6’9”+ 250+, with enough athleticism to cause matchup problems.

Caleb Swanigan
Trevion Williams
Caleb Furst*

The Scrapper- They don’t stand out for their size or athletic prowess and don’t possess the ball skills or quickness of a stretch forward.

Grady Eifert
Mason Gillis

Aircraft carrier- There is really only one position for these guys, the 7’+ club. They stand above the rest breathing the clear air at the top of the gym.

AJ Hammons
Isaac Haas
Matt Haarms
Zach Edey

What strikes me most is the success rate at Purdue of the players within each category. You might argue mis-categorization of one or two guys, and I may have missed one or two more, but there seems to be a fairly strong trend here.

Is an ‘athletic forward’ a bad fit for the system, is it a development issue, or is it just plain bad luck?

Is this enough of a trend to cause a shift in recruiting philosophy? Judging from the last couple recruiting classes, perhaps it already has.

Purdue isn't a bad fit for an athletic forward. We just never had much luck at recruiting one with skills. Usually any athletic forward with skills are rated very highly and are recruited very heavily. All the athletic forwards whom you listed had never been rated so highly.

There had only been one highly-rated Purdue athletic forward in the recent memory: JaJuan Johnson. He was a 4-star and had been excellent for us.

 

[FirstDownB]

Purdue isn't a bad fit for an athletic forward. We just never had much luck at recruiting one with skills. Usually any athletic forward with skills are rated very highly and are recruited very heavily. All the athletic forwards whom you listed had never been rated so highly.

There had only been one highly-rated Purdue athletic forward in the recent memory: JaJuan Johnson. He was a 4-star and had been excellent for us.

That’s kind of the point. Guys who are athletic and long as Wheeler but shoot and dribble like Edwards are few and far between. So you often have to pick which set you prefer. One seems to fit our system, and perhaps most systems, better.