The little I've seen he is good. The little I've seen he appeared to be more of a scorer than distributor, but I don't know that is true. Just like Sears was definitely a scorer against Purdue more than a distributor. I suspect there isn't some minimum metric that all must attain, because different teams will have their player that are listed at a spot like PG maybe be more of a combo that scores and such that running the show. I haven't seen Shead, but the others I don't think "control" the game (not only score) as much as Braden with Kolek being close. Braden has the ball soooooooo much in his hands. He gives it up frequently, but gets it back seconds later. Would be hard to rate the players since each team may have a different need for each player which can dictate the numbers some...
I've seen them all quite a bit. They're all technically points, but Shead and Sears define the word "combo" more than Newton, Smith and Kolek. Kolek is probably out of the running now that he is going to miss the final 3 games of the regular season with an injury. Shead and Smith definitely deserve is, but I think Newton is a cut above simply from watching them all. I'm not even looking at stats.
I think Shead wins it. He's not the offensive player Kolek and Newton are but he's the best defensive guard in the country. Dude is so good on that end. And he's hit a bunch of clutch shots for Houston this year.
It's the classic military "probing the defense for weaknesses" and then striking when found. Excellent floor General.
Newton averages one less assist than Braden, so very little difference there. He gets 1 more rebound and 2 points per game more than Braden.
No need to apologize! Again, I never said we shouldn't be discussing an award. Awards are great! I simply offered a different perspective on Zach's tweet and how it came across. Dang, things can really get taken out of context on here without proper reading comprehension, huh?
Just wish Purdue could send out some scouts behind enemy lines and bring back the notes...
There are some posters on this board who will argue with no matter what you say or point of view you take. They see your name and they spend 5 hours looking for some minor fault they can disagree with.
Or Iowa State basketball.You're thinking football....and Michigan.
And the others are 8 and 16. It’s probably more like it shows how important a good team can be to a great PG making a list. Some of the guys who dropped off seemed to be better PGs IMO.
I threw that pitch high and slowYou're thinking football....and Michigan.
I hope that if Purdue tries a bit of a junk defense (somewhat a combination D) with Illinois as they did for a couple of possessions against Northwestern that Matt has an easy to see signal...maybe one of the assist that doesn't stand up... stands up when in play
What is this JUNK you speak of?? Just messing with you TJ, I think it's possible we try some zo.., I mean junk tonight. I personally don't think we match up well on defense at all. Anything we can do to steal a couple possessions could be key. Efficient on offense and contain on defense. Throw the kitchen sink at them if our base defense isn't working. Good practice if nothing else.
Junk is a common term for combination defense. It is an old term and probably would better described as a combination defense. The most common "combination" defense are a box &1, diamond &1, Triangle and 2. The combination D combines man with zone. In the three examples above 1-2 players played man and the others were in a zone. Digger Phelps played a lot of combination defense years ago. Micah played it against Purdue for a few possessions in the BTT with the 1 man defender on Sasha. Typically the man defenders are on guards on the perimeter with little fear of the others scoring since the zone part is "shrunk" in size by having one or two playing man. There was no 3 pt shot when Digger coached and a defense like this has its place depending on the team you are defending. Today we may mostly see that as a ploy for a last second possession for a team that has shown zone and now wants coverage on a certain player. As an oddity I have seen Flory defended by a box and 1 where the one just tried to deny him a pass as he moved towards the ball and try to keep a body on him for the boards. However, it is usually perimeter shooters that the man defender is covering
I think you're taking it a little too seriously. Maybe you missed where I said " just messing with you TJ".
I took your messing with me just in advocating a zone since a pure zone in college I'm typically not a fan...although I can sway to a match-up along those lines. I think Purdue gives a different look, but it may only be a few feet different than normally played away from the ball. Then again, Matt may just want his team to be quicker with very similar rules. I'm guessing, but do think Matt wants coverage on the 3 ball on certain players and Matt wants the court cut in half trying to keep the drives along the baseline and not into the lane where Zach can more easily defend and the help D already has the court cut down. Easier said than done against teh athletes
Whatever we do, it won't be called a zone by CMP or his staff. That interview a few weeks ago with the assistant coaches made that very clear. So they/you/me can call it whatever and I'm happy as long as our defense is effective. So "junk" is fine with me, and that's what I was messing with you about. All is good, let's Boiler Up tonight and pull an upset! Haven't had a chance to say that since December!
I understand, but the lines of demarcation between a definition of a junk or combination defense and the man defense tweaked as I stated may be 3 to 4 feet different. I just think he will lean to a bit more sag and if that sag position wise is not relative to the imaginary line Matt has added more zone (area) to his man than typical, but he has always had zone principles in his man. The whole shell defense that Vince Edwards told me they practiced every day is in theory more of a zone lean than just defending your man for the four players not contesting the ball. That shell D I think gets tweaked a bit. I too want Purdue to win with an effective D, whatever that is. I will just be as surprised as you if it is a zone as known today
Man defense tweaked. That is what we will call any changes that are made. That should satisfy all of the zone phobia we have on this board (and in the coaches office). I know you read the same article I did with the assistant coaches comments. So you know what I'm talking about.
What they talked about had different formations or different players in different areas of the court for the same signal. It is available to see on a recording. I doubt any coach goes into the exact tweaks that take place on an interview for fans, but you can see the different formations for the same signal in the video. One could make an argument it was a combination. You describe a zone and I'll show man morphed to look the same. In every man defense lies a zone and in every...well almost all we see of zones lie a man defense. Pure Zone is defending an area which may or may not have a man in the area. Man defends a man, but maybe not "hugging" the man he is defending away from the ball. That area where you are defending a man but not on him is what? Both share similar desires.
The part of the article I'm referencing and you are not, is the part where the assistant makes it clear that the word zone will not be used in the coaches office. He is even making light of it. So yeah, I get it, they will tweak and try some different stuff and I hope we see more of it. But it won't be called a zone no matter what anyone else calls it. That was my point of the light-hearted jab. But it obviously missed the mark. I'll let this die here. You can have the last word.
