Catchings to BYU
- Thread starter FLBoiler75
- Start date
I HAVE ill will toward him as he hurt my team and I don't appreciate it. Wish him zero luck in future. If that makes me bad guy , so be it. Boiler Up!
Don't we all know some 17 or 18 y/o KIDS?
They aren't grown up, much as they look it sometimes.
They DO stupid things learning about life.
Hopefully the lessons stick.
I hope he doesn't beat us but otherwise....honestly I'd have been upset if he'd come in and displaced Myles Colvin and Cam Heide for one year of play, no matter how good. He's so skinny he's not going to be able to defend a lot of front court players so your team D is going to be worse. Does he play within the offense? Or hunt shots?
If he came in and avg 20/10 but disrupted "team" and defense in the name of those numbers, this team would suffer for it.
Not that I think Matt would let that happen.
Naw, Cam and Myles have PLENTY of upside. They are Big 10 ready NOW and they have fire in their eyes (and smiles!) and play D. (atta boy Myles!!)
They aren't grown up, much as they look it sometimes.
They DO stupid things learning about life.
Hopefully the lessons stick.
I hope he doesn't beat us but otherwise....honestly I'd have been upset if he'd come in and displaced Myles Colvin and Cam Heide for one year of play, no matter how good. He's so skinny he's not going to be able to defend a lot of front court players so your team D is going to be worse. Does he play within the offense? Or hunt shots?
If he came in and avg 20/10 but disrupted "team" and defense in the name of those numbers, this team would suffer for it.
Not that I think Matt would let that happen.
Naw, Cam and Myles have PLENTY of upside. They are Big 10 ready NOW and they have fire in their eyes (and smiles!) and play D. (atta boy Myles!!)
This is my last post regarding Mr. Catchings. I hope the discussion fades too.
You should feel however you want but I don't think he hurt your team. Purdue didn't pass on any other recruits to take him and it appears that Painter ended up thinking that he was more headache than he was worth.
If MP had decided not to oversign to take Jacobsen and then Catchings left that would have been a shame.
Seems that he's banking on immediate playing time and investment in development at BYU. I don't know whether he'll get that there but I don't think Purdue is in a position next year to invest in him the way that they did in Jaden and he doesn't plan to be around for three or four years like Zach was.
I don't know? You could be correct, but...I believe CMP always makes the best moves for his team.. I believe this was one of them.....but I am open to changing my mind as we see more about Catchings on the court. I hear we are going to get a close look in November....
Maybe…but IMO a college coaching staff that has painter and Brantley and others could have got him ready compared to a former nba assistant who hasn’t developed any college kids into nba players. But hopefully it does for his sake.
That's a possibility but if everything is true for him to most likely start/play a ton of minutes. I'd say this has put CMP/Purdue in game change mode. He'll most likely need to lean on players that were initially in their growth stages.
I have faith in CMP. He'll get these players to play through their bumps and hope to reach their goals.
Also, could this be safe to say that's why we had a couple late PF offers for the 2025 class or has this made CMP realize nothing is guaranteed even after a signature.
Last edited:
I'm not sure I follow either of those statements. I agree that Catchings was likely to play significant minutes but outside of fans who get excited about shiny new things, I hadn't seen anyone tag him as 'likely' to start.
I"m not sure who you're referring to with MP needing to rely on players in their 'growth stages'. Seems like the most likely beneficiary of Catchings being out of the mix are players like Heide and Colvin, who are significantly more experienced than Cam. Maye it indirectly results in more minutes for a Berg or Jacobsen?
I agree but it depends upon the timeline. If he ends up being a two-year player I'd bet on Brantley and Painter. If he really is a one-year guy it's probably good for him to get on the court and play through mistakes to an extent that Purdue is probably too deep to let him do.
For sure. Just hope byu lets him play through those mistakes and not bench him…. 🤔
I guess, I disagree and might have been the reason KC left. My reference was to Burgess possibly getting playing time this year vs a possible RS
Maybe, I'm completely wrong here but I think Heide and Colvin had already solidified their position and KC didn't want to share that role or work to gain the minutes he felt deserved.....could be completely wrong but don't get the statement of those 2.
Last edited:
I equate integrity with honesty not never changing your mind. Some people need morality to be simple. Usually so that they can avoid thinking about the world as gray and complicated.
So they create the idea that once you agree to something you can't ever change your mind about it or your lacking in integrity.
The kid had second thoughts. He spoke to Painter about those thoughts. Painter and he agreed that Purdue wasn't the place for him. That is not a "lack of integrity." He didn't leave the team in the middle of the season AND he didn't show up to the team conflicted or unhappy and affecting team chemistry. He contacted the staff before the season and had a discussion.
Now, if you or others wanna say he made the wrong call or he was immature or reckless or even dumb, that's a lot more valid and supportable than saying he lacks integrity.
Only you have brought up morality in this thread.
Since all we have to go by is the events as they transpired, and no one knows what was going on behind the scenes, or inside his head, then your take is no more valid and supportable than anyone else's.
Aaaand then you follow it up with a completely false statement. Wol is gonna Wol.
Got it. I'd be shocked on Burgess as I think Caleb gets more minutes before he does but who knows.
I think you're generally right on Myles and Cam having solidified roles but think that those are the guys that KC would have pushed for minutes. I guess what I'm saying is I think it's more likely that Cam, for example, now averages 32 mpg versus 25 mpg because KC isn't in the picture.
Wow. So he really did want to come back the next day and it really was that he wanted a guaranteed role.
Love that painter stayed true and said he had to compete like Edey and Fletch.
I mean he really told Catchings “Nah” after he called back the next day. Wow.
Unless you think Painter is lying this puts to bed a lot of questions on what happened with Catchings and separately with Gillis.
Nope just edited my post and included him actually talking about his convo with Catchings.
What are you referencing about Gillis? Like why he went to Duke?
That was a general statement around 'unless you think Paint is lying', wasn't aimed at you.
Yes regarding Gillis going to Duke and Painter explicitly saying that he would have held a scholarship for Gillis and Morton. A lot of fans outside of the Purdue fan base had a hard time believing that it was a really a mutual thing for Mason to not come back to Purdue.
Painter gave a press conference today and said Katchings called him back the next day after decommiting and wanted to come back and Painter said, no thanks. He said he left because he was uncertain what his role at Purdue would be. Painter replied, you create roles.
If you read my previous posts, it sure does appear katching wanted to play the 3 but painter doesn’t play 6’8 small forwards at the 3 and Katchings didn’t want to play the 4 or share it with TKR and that’s where painter wanted him to play.
You might say Katchings saw Jacobson play well at the under 19 games And was afraid he would start at center, tkr would slide into the 4 spot and Painter refused to make the 3 spot a spot for small forwards. So there was no place for Katchings.
Basically painter didn’t want to change his offense to accommodate Katchings. Who was it here that said painter would change his offense based on the talent of his players? It sure wasn’t me.
katching didn’t see an opening next year or the following year where he would have a chance to start. And he sure wasn’t going to redshirt or wait 3 years for his opportunity to shine.
Maybe byu Uses small forwards to play their 3 spot. Because it sure doesn’t look like Painter ever will. Look at his recruits. He recruits 3 point shooting guards and big men. He doesn’t recruit small forwards to play the 3. Heide, Harris, cox, Myles and all the rest are guards. Berg, Jacobson, burgess are big men. Katchings thought he had an open path to starting at the small forward position. The lone problem is Painter doesn’t have that position.
If you read my previous posts, it sure does appear katching wanted to play the 3 but painter doesn’t play 6’8 small forwards at the 3 and Katchings didn’t want to play the 4 or share it with TKR and that’s where painter wanted him to play.
You might say Katchings saw Jacobson play well at the under 19 games And was afraid he would start at center, tkr would slide into the 4 spot and Painter refused to make the 3 spot a spot for small forwards. So there was no place for Katchings.
Basically painter didn’t want to change his offense to accommodate Katchings. Who was it here that said painter would change his offense based on the talent of his players? It sure wasn’t me.
katching didn’t see an opening next year or the following year where he would have a chance to start. And he sure wasn’t going to redshirt or wait 3 years for his opportunity to shine.
Maybe byu Uses small forwards to play their 3 spot. Because it sure doesn’t look like Painter ever will. Look at his recruits. He recruits 3 point shooting guards and big men. He doesn’t recruit small forwards to play the 3. Heide, Harris, cox, Myles and all the rest are guards. Berg, Jacobson, burgess are big men. Katchings thought he had an open path to starting at the small forward position. The lone problem is Painter doesn’t have that position.
Last edited:
How in the world do you get that based off what painter said? You have no clue more then the rest of us what position Catchings was going to play or want to play. Cmon Wole, you’re reaching, especially with this.
Ah yeah got it. Yeah lots of Purdue folk were taken off guard that we’d let Gillis walk. But we all knew that he wasn’t coming back and wasn’t a shock. Gillis is going to play on a really good team this year with a lot of nba talent. Good for him.
Morton…well I think we could see he didnt have a role anymore and made sense to part ways. Hope he can get some good mins at Colorado state.
You just completely made this up from thin air. Completely contrary to the reports.
But it's your world, strange as it is.
Gillis will have a strong leadership role for that young talented team. I hope he and Morton do well.
CMP will not bend to let anyone take over his program. He has established a sustainable, successful program. We are just a fortunate fan base and kids commiting to play for him should feel the same.....great leader.
Ah I see what you mean. Just listened to whole interview and he confirms that they all talked before beginning of year.
If anyone else wants to listen to the 17 min long interview, it’s a good one with good insights all around. If you click the article, the interview is the video for the article.
Did you read the press conference? Painter basically said all those things. He was very clear! Catchings decommited. Then he contacted Painterthe next day and painter said no thanks . Those are painters words ! That’s kind of obvious.
Next painter said the issue was about what role he would play. And painter said Edey and Loyer didn’t have roles, they created them. That’s also straight from painter and kind of obvious.
Painter said catchings left because of his uncertainty about what role he would play, it’s kind of obvious for the last 5 years, painter plays a guard at the 3 and not a small forward.
If catchings left because he didn’t know what his role was going to be as painter said in his press conference, it’s kind of obvious. That Catchings finally realized he wasn’t going to play the 3 any time soon at Purdue. And if Catchings wanted to play the 4, he would have had no reason to leave and Tkr could play the 5.
Painter is never forthcoming about the real reasons players leave. And he doesn’t talk negative about players. But it’s kind of obvious there have been a lot of behind the scenes issues. Painter doesn’t usually say anything about players other than he wishes them well. Painter said publicly in his press conference that catching asked to return and he said no. That speaks volumes!
So when Painter says catching left because he didn’t understand what his role at Purdue would be , it’s kind of easy to conclude Catchings wanted to play the 3 and painter said no, you will play the 4.
And so Catchings said fine and left. I’ll wager at BYU that Catchings will play the 3 and not the 4
The fact more people laughed and liked that comment than collectively any of your comments in 2024 should tell you otherwise!
Painter said Catchings left because he wasn’t sure what his role would be. Catchings has already said he was only going to play 1 year maybe 2 max at college Looking at Purdue and your knowledge of it and Painter, what Role would you see Catchings playing at Purdue the next two years?
Do you see Catchings starting at the 3? I sure don’t. Not with Painter’s love of playing. Guards at the three.
Do you see catchings starting at the 4? I don’t. TKR has 2 years left. And if Jacobson doesn’t start at the 5 this year, he surely will next year.
what role do you see catchings playing the next two years? Coming off the bench?
I believe this is a clear case that Catchings realized that there was no clear role for him at Purdue. Painter already brought in Harrisand Myles and those other two guards to play the three.
I personally don’t see Catchings as a 4 in college or in the pros!
A couple of days ago, Catchings said his focus had changed and he wanted to focus on playing in the nba. That sure sounded like he wanted to start and also play the position he was going to play in the pros. Catchings is never going to play the 4 in the pros. So it seems natural he would want to play the 3 and start at the 3, And it seems logical Painter said no. At Purdue, guards play the 3.
So catchings left to play for a school that will slow him to play the 3. Does that really sound like I’m stretching and reaching?
Again, you also talk more about me than I do! I guess that’s what you like to do. Rather than staying on topic, it’s much more fun for you to berate others like me.
You don’t even know how to spell his name yet you are the one person here who thinks he wants to play the 3, lol.
You literally just posted in another thread that “katchings” was going to play the 3 and now that he decommitted painter would go BACK to a 3 guard system. It was literally you and ONLY you who said what you are accusing of others and not yourself for saying Purdue would change his system. You make up in your head every post whatever you want to try to be right….
You bring it upon yourself when many of your posts are gloating on here you are the only one who goes out on a limb and are right, when reality is you post contradictory comments everywhere hoping to strike gold.
The biggest question is the context and definition of the term role. Painter said Catchings wasn’t sure what his role would be.
Some people may interpret that as Catchings wasn’t sure if his role was going to be as a starter or coming off the bench or platooning with another player.
My interpretation of Catchings not knowing what his role was going to be is more about the position he wanted to play was in conflict with the position painter told him he was going to play. My interpretation is that Catchings wanted to play the 3 and that wasn’t going to happen at Purdue.
And that’s the real reason he left.
I believe we can all agree Catchings wanted to start. Where we disagree is the interpretation of what Painter meant by his usage of the term role. Was it about starting? Or was it about his position he’d be expected to play?
Some people may interpret that as Catchings wasn’t sure if his role was going to be as a starter or coming off the bench or platooning with another player.
My interpretation of Catchings not knowing what his role was going to be is more about the position he wanted to play was in conflict with the position painter told him he was going to play. My interpretation is that Catchings wanted to play the 3 and that wasn’t going to happen at Purdue.
And that’s the real reason he left.
I believe we can all agree Catchings wanted to start. Where we disagree is the interpretation of what Painter meant by his usage of the term role. Was it about starting? Or was it about his position he’d be expected to play?
There were 5s in the nba playoffs that had similar size and skillset as catchings. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 it doesn’t matter, nba scouts find talent.
Similar threads
