With TKR, Jacobsen, Burgess, maybe a Portal 4-5 not sure he’d be the backup.or he can be the backup center on a national title contender.
With the chance to earn the start.
He out rebounds most of the team, what is your point? Smith also plays almost 40 minutes a game versus a guy that barely gets minutes.Because our 6' point guard can out rebound him.
YOu tell me? He recruited him! DO you think Painter recruited guys to ride the bench? D1 scholarship players!There is nothing, and I mean nothing, to suggest giving Berg more minutes, at this point in time, will result in a substantial leap in quality of play.
Cline absolutely looked like a better prospect than Berg does. Do you think Painter has this talented guy if only he gave him more minutes but just is blind or unwilling to try it on a team that only has three players over 6-9 actively playing in total besides him?
Painter absolutely would like to be able to play Berg more. He would absolutely love to put him out there at the 5 and TKR at the 4 and have rim protection, rebounding and a balanced group. Why do you think he doesn't do it?
You nailed it!A quintuple zero stat line 😂
I mean recruited players don't pan out. No coach is 100 percent on that. So yeah, it's always a possibility. So you think what Painter is not playing a talented big on purpose? Out of stupidity? What?YOu tell me? He recruited him! DO you think Painter recruited guys to ride the bench? D1 scholarship players!
Berg was definitely a project coming in. Edey was the same. They don't all pan out. I'd say more often they don't.I mean recruited players don't pan out. No coach is 100 percent on that. So yeah, it's always a possibility. So you think what Painter is not playing a talented big on purpose? Out of stupidity? What?
Hammonds and Haarms were much quicker, were great shot blockers from day one.He's not quick enough against a lot of matchups. His footspeed and reaction times are a little slow at this point. he's not getting the opportunities he did but he's also not getting exposed and his confidence crushed. We've played some teams that are very quick and he doens't match up well in those. Furst moves his feet pretty well for a big. He plays solid defense and mostly stays in front of his man. Burgess is promising but still sometimes making freshman mistakes. He's shooting 40% to Fursts 50. 25% freethrows to Fursts 75%. If 2 guys are even those numbers will get 1 more playing time.
Will has some skills, his season isnt' over.
His time may well come.
Berg's field goal percentages are a lot higher than Fursts and for minutes played his rebounding is pretty good, considering he hasn't played much. I do not remember Hammons, Haas, Haarms or Edey being very fast either. Comes with the territory I reckon, being over 7 ft.
With DJ back (assuming) TKR is the starting 4 and Burgess a backup 4. Plenty of space for Burg if he beats out Burgess.With TKR, Jacobsen, Burgess, maybe a Portal 4-5 not sure he’d be the backup.
Didn’t Painter also give a scholarship to a legacy player knowing he would never start? Wadell perhaps? Don’t tell people Painter only gives scholarships to players who are projected starters. Wadell will always ride the bench as a role player. Successful teams also need players to ride the bench.YOu tell me? He recruited him! DO you think Painter recruited guys to ride the bench? D1 scholarship players!
Many times? Can you provide those example?Many times a legacy player will receive a scholarship over a more deserving player.
When Berg was playing at the beginning of the season, the only stats he was exceling in was fouls. CMP said himself when ask about the switch to the smaller lineup "We weren't rebounding with the bigger lineup & the offense can do more things with this lineup".He out rebounds most of the team, what is your point? Smith also plays almost 40 minutes a game versus a guy that barely gets minutes.
Painter has made it clear that Defense and Rebounding are what he needs from his Bigs this year to get more playing time. Berg started strong with rebounding but has faded lately. My personal thoughts are that Berg will get his chance again soon. Teams we've played recently were very athletic and Furst made more sense due to Athle
+1 - We got incredibly lucky with Zach. 1 in a million to go THAT far. But lots of our bigs have been projects.Berg was definitely a project coming in. Edey was the same. They don't all pan out. I'd say more often they don't.
I am defending more of his case for playing time over all you arguing for Furst to be playing more. You are acting like I don't make sense, but on the flip side of the pro Furst first players, is there is ANYTHING Furst does anymore than Berg to justify his minutes? Athleticism is a cheap answer, when he loses the ball so much and BOTCHES a WIDE OPEN DUNK. ... NOT TO MENTION ONCE AGAIN, HE is supposed to be more experienced, but what GOOD is that, if he isn't playing consistently well by NOW? For EVERYONE saying Berg doesn't bring much, you haven't provided a clear path why Furst should play more. If it's because you LOVE HIM SO MUCH , then please just say that, because that explains ALOT!I mean recruited players don't pan out. No coach is 100 percent on that. So yeah, it's always a possibility. So you think what Painter is not playing a talented big on purpose? Out of stupidity? What?
To be fair to the other bigs, ZACH WAS NOTHING his sophomore year, like his junior and senior years and I LOVE ME SOME EDEY!+1 - We got incredibly lucky with Zach. 1 in a million to go THAT far. But lots of our bigs have been projects.
You should more attention to what we are actually saying.I am defending more of his case for playing time over all you arguing for Furst to be playing more. You are acting like I don't make sense, but on the flip side of the pro Furst first players, is there is ANYTHING Furst does anymore than Berg to justify his minutes? Athleticism is a cheap answer, when he loses the ball so much and BOTCHES a WIDE OPEN DUNK. ... NOT TO MENTION ONCE AGAIN, HE is supposed to be more experienced, but what GOOD is that, if he isn't playing consistently well by NOW? For EVERYONE saying Berg doesn't bring much, you haven't provided a clear path why Furst should play more. If it's because you LOVE HIM SO MUCH , then please just say that, because that explains ALOT!
Maybe this has been asked as I haven't been on here for a few weeks or so, but Why is Berg not playing more? I don't think you can honestly say " because he isn't playing well", or you would have to say that about the other two. I do not think Furst does anything more while he is in. If he does I haven't seen it. Not trying to bash the guy, just trying to compare as to why he would get a few more minutes. All the bigs have to get better, but Burgess I would give the most rope to for mistakes, as he is the youngest.
Painter sees him everyday!!! I Trust him!! Many of you do not know ____________________!!!!Maybe this has been asked as I haven't been on here for a few weeks or so, but Why is Berg not playing more? I don't think you can honestly say " because he isn't playing well", or you would have to say that about the other two. I do not think Furst does anything more while he is in. If he does I haven't seen it. Not trying to bash the guy, just trying to compare as to why he would get a few more minutes. All the bigs have to get better, but Burgess I would give the most rope to for mistakes, as he is the youngest.
Plays better defense by a mile to start.I am defending more of his case for playing time over all you arguing for Furst to be playing more. You are acting like I don't make sense, but on the flip side of the pro Furst first players, is there is ANYTHING Furst does anymore than Berg to justify his minutes? Athleticism is a cheap answer, when he loses the ball so much and BOTCHES a WIDE OPEN DUNK. ... NOT TO MENTION ONCE AGAIN, HE is supposed to be more experienced, but what GOOD is that, if he isn't playing consistently well by NOW? For EVERYONE saying Berg doesn't bring much, you haven't provided a clear path why Furst should play more. If it's because you LOVE HIM SO MUCH , then please just say that, because that explains ALOT!
He wasn't what he was as a jr and sr, but he was more or less even with Trevion Williams, a borderline NBA player and Sr veteran.To be fair to the other bigs, ZACH WAS NOTHING his sophomore year, like his junior and senior years and I LOVE ME SOME EDEY!
I do?? I have been watching Purdue bball for a long time.You should more attention to what we are actually saying.
Calebs biggest plus over Will is his ability to move his feet. Botcthing a dunk means you aren't athletic? That's just silly.
It on DEFENSIVE end that Will has been overmatched.
And I've stated that repeatedly......
Caleb Furst stays in front of his man most of the time.
He moves pretty darn well for a big. Will on the other hand is on the bigger and slower end of the scale of big men.
Don't try to make us look like we favor one player over another.
MOST OF US DO NOT!
We care about PURDUE winning and if that means starting the 5 guys on the end of the bench THAT WOULD BE FINE....
Pay attention to what is actually happening on the court.
Not what you wish would happen.
Weird.Didn’t Painter also give a scholarship to a legacy player knowing he would never start? Wadell perhaps? Don’t tell people Painter only gives scholarships to players who are projected starters. Wadell will always ride the bench as a role player. Successful teams also need players to ride the bench.
At Kentucky, in the past, they would give 1-2 players a scholarship to help keep their overall GPA over the minimum team required standard. With all of their one and dones, they needed someone who actually went to class.
Many times a legacy player will receive a scholarship over a more deserving player.
Plays better defense by a mile to start.
Very, very debatable, but I will let this topic rest. We all have different opinions of certain players.Plays better defense by a mile to start.
Oh you're the one. Yeah the rest of us only started this year.I do?? I have been watching Purdue bball for a long time.