That may be the greatest autocorrect in history.Haha - Death Wish for Boiler opponents!
Brandon Newman
- Thread starter SKYDOG
- Start date
I thought Brandon played well tonight and probably needs to play with Zach more and take some minutes from Loyer. Having said that, I'd question the understanding of basketball of anyone who thinks that he is in the same league as Morton as a defender after watching tonight.
That’s a joke right. Airballs threes and misses FTs. Plus not half as tough as Gillis. How have we played since Gillis quit starting? Need his energy.
I don't believe in a 'good loss', but I'd hope this team, players and coaches, take some good out of this. I like Caleb a lot but Mason needs to be out there with Zach. Fletcher has been outstanding but if he can't consistently hit threes that Brandon needs to be out there with Zach.
Having said that, if Zach doesn't get called for two really bad fouls (travel on Cliff O. and then going after a lob that he has a much right to as Cliff) this isn't a close game.
Really, this is not a relevant topic after this game. The 24 pt half did them in -- which was more a function of a bad call on Edey & inexperienced frosh guards who had trouble with flat out GREAT D by Rutgers.
Missed FTs and TOs. When we shoot poorly, the defense is able to collapse more on Zach and make things difficult for him. Good effort but our young guards go exposed in the first half. Good comeback from 13 down, just couldn't get over the hump.
I feel like our freshman had the light turn on regarding the effort needed as tge second half progressed.
Hopefully, yes - we shall see. I did like the second half effort, fight, and energy better.
A couple of Matt Painter post-game comments to illuminate:
"We know what's coming. What Rutgers did tonight didn't shock us. If we were going to war, we'd stop by New Jersey and pick them up." "They were mentally and physically better tonight, even if we had won the game there at the end."
"You want them to be physically and mentally tougher than they were. Then, clean up the sloppiness."
He also took the heat that's on him as much as them.....also, they were definitely trying to stay with the shooters. His biggest criticism though was the turnovers, giving up some second chances, and some empty possessions from just mental mistakes.
This is still a really good Purdue team - sometimes the perspective is off, especially the way they rose in the rankings.....building blocks and these are the tough nights that come with the territory......stay the course.
It was a tale of two halfs. I haven't seen teh stats or was able to listen to Matt since my daughter called me as I was walking to the car.
That said Purdue lost the game and lost it early. As Purdue was farting around on the perimeter looking for the three, Rutgers extended its D and put Purdue on its heels jumping the passing lanes and pushing the bigs out 5 or 6 feet farther than desired. Rutgers was physical and Purdue was soft. Purdue had players that thought they were open and let it fly...sometimes leaning sideways to start the game, but it wasn't in the flow and they were nto ready, but shot anyway.
Meanwhile, Rutgers was getting much better shots and making them...many in the lane using their height. Zach didn't exist in the offense much early and there was little ball movement vertically either in drives or post feeds down low. It was halftime and Purdue was down 40% of what it scored with 50% of the game remaining and little heart beat.
In the second half Purdue embraced the grind rather than looking for the quick 3ball and started getting the ball towards the basket. Being successful then led to open 3s instead of what was shot the first half. Purdue played physical and battled on teh boards...and all fo a sudden Rutgers lost some poise and the tide had started to turn. Once Fletcher hit the 3 to go up 2 I thought Purdue had it...luckily, but had it. I knew they couldn't give up a 3 or foul on a 2 and at worse go into OT, but a rule of thumb for many coaches is to go for the win not OT as a visitor which no doubt depends on fouls and other things, but Rutgers went for the 3 ball.
It was a physical game called and what we see in the Big a LOT. I hope Gene is okay seeing Purdue so soft early. I'd hate to lose him...
Good post. Unfortunate to not come out with a win but good experience to get punched in the mouth and have Zach taken out of the first half on a bad call. This was going to happen at some point, hopefully it makes the team better and they can salvage the week with a win in Columbus.
They didn't even look for Zach inside in the first half. He didn't have great position but there were plenty of entry pass opportunities that they passed on.
Purdue was on its heels. The aggressor was Rutgers on D. Purdue was fooling around on the perimeter and was soft. There wasn't an attack to the rim with the ball or player to force some calls. Instead, Purdue made it easy with mostly perimeter play. If you aren't going to attack the rim, a team that plays good D will become the aggressor and jump the passing lanes and tighten up the D making it hard to pass inside There is a common theme on offense and defense for both halves and it had to do with embracing the physical play the refs were allowing. Lack of physical play hurt Purdue on D and O the first half and Purdue responded the second half by being more physical and aggressive. Now Purdue was more physical inside with some better screens and Zach was getting the ball and shooters had better looks than anytime the first half. Purdue had slowed down and was not sped up like the first half taking shots that were not there.
Rutgers owned the first half by being the aggressor. They knew it would be a battle and came for war, Purdue didn't and then lost some poise as well. You know this was totally avoidable, but then you know that kids don't always do what you want or understand until it is too late. It's over and I hope this doesn't haunt them later, but losing at home is not a good start and neither is thinking any Big team will be easy if Purdue only hits open shots...
i thought the refs took zach out early by allowing number 11 on rutgers to hold him every time down the court. that messed up our whole offensive set
Best bet to attack on offenses is to get the ball to Zack, which they didn’t do in the first half.Purdue was on its heels. The aggressor was Rutgers on D. Purdue was fooling around on the perimeter and was soft. There wasn't an attack to the rim with the ball or player to force some calls. Instead, Purdue made it easy with mostly perimeter play. If you aren't going to attack the rim, a team that plays good D will become the aggressor and jump the passing lanes and tighten up the D making it hard to pass inside There is a common theme on offense and defense for both halves and it had to do with embracing the physical play the refs were allowing. Lack of physical play hurt Purdue on D and O the first half and Purdue responded the second half by being more physical and aggressive. Now Purdue was more physical inside with some better screens and Zach was getting the ball and shooters had better looks than anytime the first half. Purdue had slowed down and was not sped up like the first half taking shots that were not there.
Rutgers owned the first half by being the aggressor. They knew it would be a battle and came for war, Purdue didn't and then lost some poise as well. You know this was totally avoidable, but then you know that kids don't always do what you want or understand until it is too late. It's over and I hope this doesn't haunt them later, but losing at home is not a good start and neither is thinking any Big team will be easy if Purdue only hits open shots...
There were bad calls...no question. Can't control that. Purdue was too soft early...played on their heels. If the refs are allowing holding...start. You can't let a team get a physical advantage. They came to mix it up early while Purdue was hoisting bad shots on the perimeter early...not a good tone setter.
okay, that is certainly one way and typically the best way. Why weren't they doing it? If the ball isn't going inside either by a pass or body, then be default it must be on the outside. Why was the ball or as I said a few times farting around on the perimeter? Was Purdue thinking they could look pretty and hit a few 3s even if they weren't there? Purdue did not embrace the physical play the first half. Purdue was on it's heels and not attacking the inside with pass or body and so why shouldn't Rutgers continue to extend its D pressure?
Rutgers understood this wasn't a game of horse, but understood it was a game of exchanging sweat. It wasn't going to be decided in a few minutes, but decided by who played the hardest, the longest and the smartest and they did all three. Rutgers knew this would be a war as did the Purdue coaches, but the players didn't...part of youth. We have all heard the saying that a smart person learns from his mistakes. However, a wise person learns from the mistakes of others and doesn't have to make the mistake to learn it. Hope it doesn't hurt Purdue in the Big. The problem shown today was not mentally ready for a physical battle. The coaches know they should have won and no doubt tried to tell the players this was a Big game and would be tough...sometimes a wrestling match. I wish they could have learned and luckily won... ;(
on the last possession, why didnt zach shoot the ball? he had it in his range 3 times and he kept kicking it out to our guards beyond the 3 point line. all we needed was a two. even if he missed, he would have a good chance of rebounding and putting it back in. i tried to yell at him to shoot but from row 8 of 118 he didnt hear me.
Confused me too. Seemed like no one wanted to take the shot? Perhaps CMP wanted an outside shot with a chance for a put back? But I would think the NPOTY candidate would be option #1, 2 and 3??
I think Matt "and many others" could point out specific occurences that could have been better. They always exist. This game was lost early. A horrible tone was set in the first minute that continued through the first half. That tone takes in a LOT of specific issues On O and D. Purdue was not ready for the grind Rutgers wanted...not a lot different than the Peacocks last year and for the most part...most losses.
We've all heard from numerous coaches that the first 5 minutes of each half are very important and set the tone. Fletch took a hurry up three where he wasn't even vertical, but was leaning to his left at maybe a 30 degree angle. Why? What was the thought? A few seconds later Brandon nailed one from the baseline opposite Rutger's bench, but he wasn't really ready to shoot it appeared and seemed a bit lucky it went in.
The second half first five minutes was completely different than the start of the game and surprise...the results were different...slow in showing up on the scoreboard, but were there. Purdue cut the lead Rutgers had at half to around 5 points but took 10 minutes to do so. Still enough time and now heading in the right direction. Remember that at half time Rutgers lead was 40% of what Purdue scored in the first half and now there is only 50% of the game remaining. Still, being aggressive on O and D was turning the tide for Purdue and now...all of a sudden all those punches inside left a much more open three ball for Purdue.
The refs let them play and the team that was the most physical, played the hardest, the longest, and the smartest for the whole game won the game. Was it youth that started teh game so bad? Perhaps, but it isn't the first time this year that this game was so different at the start...it was that Rutgers was just better than some previous games and those errors were magnified for all to see...but they were there in other games.
I have no doubt the coaches were aware. I'm a fan of Matt. I think he is a very good coach and a coach that has forgot more than any fan on this site. That said...with all the shortcomings Gene had, you knew the teams were generally ready for the physical battle. It's over, but you hope they learn because there are other physical teams in the BIG and we know sometimes those physical games exist in the tourney. AS one that lacks what Matt knows I would still like a few mandates or strong suggestions for the team.
Similar threads
