If Carsen comes in and has the same type of impact Melo Trimble did as a freshman. How far does Purdue go?
Carsen/Melo
- Thread starter takedownboiler
- Start date
That would be a very interesting season to watch. I would hope for elite 8 or better. It seems all Purdue has lacked in the past few years is a dynamic guard that can hit the three and drive to create with equal skill sets to throw defenses off. That said, I am a firm believer that the NCAA tourney is more about match-ups than anything else.
Painter already said he wants C. Edwards to play at the 2 as much (or more) than he wants him at the 1. So, just that right there already changes the idea of this hypothetical: Trimble plays the 1 almost 100% of the time.
I think you're over-thinking the question. No two situations are exactly alike. The question was only about impact.
If Spike comes in and plays like Steve Nash how do you think our season plays out???
I'm not overthinking it: I think C. Edwards would be more effective playing the majority of his minutes at the 1. Putting your team's most dynamic playmaking guard at the 2 most of the time (Keady with Ricky Hall, Woody Austin, Matt Waddell, Chad Austin, & Willie Deane; Painter with E'Twaun Moore and now CE) is counterproductive for the offense.
When you say that, are you assuming a continuity offense like Painter's? If so, I'd like to hear your argument.
So you are taking the opinion of a 3 time B1G Coach of the Year, who said that Carsen is a much more effective 2 / combo guard right now for the early part of his career rather then strictly being a 1, as false? I'll trust the guy who not only scouted Carsen but sold him on Purdue as a place he could grow in to a better player. Will Carsen eventually become a 1 or need to play the 1 at points next year? Sure, but looking at the game footage from Spain, he is much better off the ball where he can use his athleticism to create space through the movement of the offense, get the ball in a position either on the wing or top of the key, and then create a play. His ability to create would be a ball-dominate type of player (probably why Melo struggled last year when they had a number of weapons that took his ability to be ball dominate away) that would break the offensive flow of the motion offense down. This isn't the pick and roll of the NBA.
I think someone doesn't understand the basic tenets of the motion offense. How was having Smooge at the 2 counterproductive for the offense?
Hasn't played a minute of D1 ball and he is already B1G all freshman team caliber? Like the enthusiasm!
Painter recognizes with the makeup of this team, he can play a bunch of smaller guys together on offense because they can all shoot very well. We can spread teams out 1-4 (sometimes 1-5 with Biggie or Taylor) and put the pressure on teams to defend all over the court. I'm sure teams will end up zoning us quite a bit because of that....but even then, when you have 4 guys on the perimeter who are high percentage 3 point shooters, that leaves Biggie or Haas inside with a major advantage if we rotate the ball decently. If a team doubles down on Haas, there should be a guy who ends up with an open outside shot if the ball moves.
There will be a lot more driving lanes this year because of teams not being able to sag off guys like they could last year with Ray and Hill.
Defensively is where it gets interesting, but I think we will be alright as long as we rebound well.
There will be a lot more driving lanes this year because of teams not being able to sag off guys like they could last year with Ray and Hill.
Defensively is where it gets interesting, but I think we will be alright as long as we rebound well.
Yeah, maybe a bit over the top, but it's been a while since I've been this excited about a freshman guard coming into Purdue. Only time will tell, but I'm excited to see what dynamic he can add to this team. Of course, I was even more excited about Stephens in 2013 and thought he would be an absolute stud for 3-4 years, so take it for what it's worth.
The only think that is obviously true about this post is that you are not overthinking.
Ft. Wayne Concordia....one of my favorite Boilers.
He was moved to the 2 in his final season in favor of Steve Reid (1983-1984). You're definitely not overthinking it.
He started at the 1 for one season (1982-1983) and then he was moved to the 2 in favor of Steve Reid in his senior season: it's a perfect example of Keady replacing a guard at the 1 with a less dynamic guard and similar to what Painter will be doing if he puts C. Edwards at the 2 more often than the 1.
If you are using 1984 as an example of a poor coaching job by Keady, I'm not sure that you are helping your case.
BoilerDaddy, it doesn't matter when it's from: if it's true, it's true.
No, it is not: http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/purdue/1984.html
No, it is not: http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/purdue/1984.html
To me, this is like saying Markell Jones should be playing QB because he would touch the va every play and he is Purdue's most dynamic player. It doesn't always simply work that way. In all honesty, you do realize that 9-10 of the other teams in the conference would take PJ as a starter and I am guessing that he would be starting at most all other D1 schools that aren't perennially in the top 15-20 of class recruiting rankings. Give PJ credit where it is due...maybe looking at the fact that PJ is playing well enough to all Carsen to play his natural position is a massive positive instead of viewing it as a negative because Carsen won't be playing the one?
I think you're missing my point. In 1983-84, with Russell Cross having left early for the NBA, Purdue was picked by most publications to finish 9th out of 10 Big Ten teams. Instead, Purdue tied for the Big Ten championship with a 15-3 record. Gene Keady won 5 different national coach of the year awards that season.
It sounds like you are suggesting that he used his guards wrong that season. If he had only let Ricky Hall handle the ball more (or something, I really don't know what), the Boilers would have reached their potential. I don't really care who you call the 1 and who you call the 2 on that team; Keady was brilliant.
More to the question I raised in an earlier post, why is playing your most dynamic guard at the 2 in a continuity offense counter-productive? You state that like it is like an absolute fact, but you don't explain why. Why should I agree with you?
Regarding Painter, you call him inflexible, but it seems to me that he is being flexible in this case, so he can get Edwards on the floor more as a freshman. It seems to me that you are taking a rigid position without even acknowledging that Painter might have valid reasons for his current plan.
Last edited:
And what about that link supports your argument? Is it because Reid had more assists? If yes, would you then call Vince Edwards the PG the last two seasons? Because he led the team in assists.
I watched those games. I know who the point guard was. It was Ricky Hall.
And if you still don't believe me, watch the first 5 minutes of this and get back to me (note...don't watch it all, it is depressing):
Nag, my question to you is not if those players played the two but why do you think that is a bad decision. The only reason to not play your most dynamic scorer at the two is if you want to run high ball screens and pick & rolls all night like an NBA team. I Love the idea of C Edwards at the two. If we want to run some isolations or high screens for him in crunch time, do it. Labeling him a 2 doesn't mean you can't do it when it fits the situation.
Bingo. After game 2 in Spain, Painter told Cliz in the postgame interview, "He [Carsen] has shot the ball well. He's attacked the basket. You know, really looking for him to give us something off the bounce especially in ball screen action."
Painter seems well aware of Carsen's strengths & wants to let him use them as best as he can. I see having Carsen play the 2 being more about not burdening a true frosh with the non-scoring aspects of playing the point & just letting him focus on doing what he does best (appears to be scoring points).
I agree.
I also think the best way to make Carsen Edwards successful is to deliver the ball to him in a position to succeed. If he can catch the ball with advantage, his quick release becomes a huge weapon, which in turn forces the defense to close hard and opens up his drive. I'd much rather have him shoot most of his threes off the catch than off the dribble this season.
Then ball screens can be mixed in to create even more opportunities. I suspect that Carsen and Biggie will team for several pick and rolls this season.
It's a combination of playing the more dynamic guard (i.e. C. Edwards) at the 1 and using more "NBA" pick-and-roll high ball-screen sets in those situations (for him) while still playing the motion offense and using him at the 2 other times. Basically, I believe it would be beneficial for this offense to not use the motion as much when CE is playing the 1.
Smooge uses to come off pick and rolls all of the time. Same goes for Hummel. That's the beauty of the motion. It's harder to predict and allows for the person with the advantage to exploit it.
Sometimes it's hard to predict. I wouldn't say it's always or even mostly hard to predict who the first option will be in the motion, hence my stance on wanting to see different kinds of sets ran at times.
What is we stop caring about who plays the 1 or 2 in the motion offense? I want our best 5 out there at all times, matchup dependence is key here. I am looking forward to seeing how this team gels and grows during the season. Carsen will find his place and the more he plays the better he will be equipped to handle the 1 or 2, even tho lets be honest anyone can bring the ball up in the motion offense and run a set, ask Robbie Hummel.
Boiler up my friends.
Boiler up my friends.
Your seeing the reality. Motion does make it hard to predict who is going to shoot. That is its beauty. You can also run set plays for whomever coach wants too. You can also feed the ball to whoever you want and turn them loose to run the show with the ball in their hands. All of these things have been happening for the last 35 years. You may not recognize it, but it has. If Carsen is good at it, you will see a lot of "play number one" for him regardless of his positional number.
Amen brother! 1-2-3 makes little difference in Purdue's offense.
We just need one of them to (1) notice there is a press, (2) get open to help the guy with the ball, and (3) make the defense pay for pressing. All three were missing from some of our games.
A guy from Memphis would still launch himself off of someone's back and get a tip in at the buzzer to deny us a Final Four.
Lorenzen Wright pushed Roy Hairston and David Vaughn tipped it in after that. Wright was murdered a few years ago.
Even if they beat Memphis, they would have to had to beat Arkansas (Corliss Williamson, Scotty Thurman, Corey Beck, Alex Dillard, etc.: they played a rotation of about 11 or 12 guys and were at or near the peak of their "40 minutes of hell press D" under Nolan Richardson. If they beat Arkansas, they would have had to beat Virginia (Cory Alexander, Junior Burrough, Harold Deane, Curtis Staples, etc.). So, I don't think beating Memphis would have really paved a "clear path" for them that year (2000 was the last "clear path" opportunity).
Similar threads
