Cleansing of souls

[DwaynePurvis00]

Pretty straightforward - which player here would you rather want?

Player #1 (per 40 minutes, conference play):
FG%: 44.7
2P%: 47.7
3P%: 40.0
FT%: 86.4
Rebounds: 4.6
Assists: 5.8
Steals: 1.5
Turnovers: 2.4
Pts: 12.8

Offensive rating: 122.2
Defensive rating: 102.6


Player #2 (per 40 minutes, conference play):
FG%: 43.5
2P%: 45.2
3P%: 39.7
FT%: 84.0
Rebounds: 7.1
Assists: 8.4
Steals: 1.7
Turnovers: 3.2
Pts: 13.8

Offensive rating: 118.1
Defensive rating: 106.6



I have to squint to see any real changes here - Player 1 is Braden his frosh year, Player 2 is Braden his soph year. That's not to say he's going to be an absolute monster by his senior year (he very well could be, based on trajectories of our players). But we needed more firepower at the wing positions to deal with teams like UConn.

Fletch is below - same challenge applies. I don't see a major evolution here, either:

Player #1 (per 40 minutes, conference play):

FG%: 40.3
2P%: 46.4
3P%: 33.3
FT%: 83.0
Rebounds: 2.4
Assists: 3.4
Steals: 0.8
Turnovers: 1.8
Pts: 15.6

Offensive rating: 110.9
Defensive rating: 104.1



Player #2 (per 40 minutes, conference play):
FG%: 43.6
2P%: 39.5
3P%: 48.5
FT%: 81.0
Rebounds: 2.8
Assists: 3.2
Steals: 0.6
Turnovers: 1.8
Pts: 15.4

Offensive rating: 120.1
Defensive rating: 106.1


Player 1: Fletch, 22-23; Player 2: Fletch, 23-24.


Don't get me wrong - love both kids and think they will be certified legends by the time they go through Senior Day festivities. But I would've loved to see us pair up against UConn with a little more firepower at least two more positions instead of being outgunned at every spot except the 5. I assume "Fletch shooting from March on" excludes the title game, of course....

Why are you taking conference play and not the whole season for per 40?

Braden from 23 to 24 -
FG%: +.3%
2P%: -3.5%
3P%: +5.5% (!!!!)
FT%: -7.3%
Rebounds: +1.3/game from 5.5 to 6.8 which is outstanding for a guard listed at 6 foot

Assists: +3/game(!!!!!) that’s 5.8 to 8.8
Steals: +0.3/game
Turnovers: +0.5/game
Pts: +1.3/ game from 12.8 to 14.1

And that was in almost 300 more mins than previous year. But through 35, he had played 112 more mins.

Fletch from 23 to 24 per 40:

FG%: +5%
2P%: -2%
3P%: +11.8% (!!!!!!!)
FT%: +6.7%
Rebounds: +0.6/game
Assists: -0.6/game
Steals: +0.3/game
Turnovers: flat
Pts: -.4/game

And for Fletch, this was in only 76 more mins in 4 more games…through 35 games this year he played 955 or 55 mins less through 35 games last year.

And when you say “teams like UConn”…uconn is the ONLY team like UCONN 😂. UConn was the ONLY team all year that shut them and everyone else besides Zach down. That may be due to having a lotto pick as a guard, a lotto pick at center, and two 5th year seniors who normally wouldn’t have been playing on their team. But they had an extra year due to Covid. They also all had length.

So not sure how you’re not satisfied with their Frosh to sophomore jumps, but what would you have actually expected?

 

[titaniumbolt]

So not sure how you’re not satisfied with their Frosh to sophomore jumps, but what would you have actually expected?

You make a big deal about their per 40 over the season - trying to slice and dice for differences (hard to do, which has been my point since my original comment).

But you left out their efficiency numbers, which account for tempo, minutes played, etc:

Smith (all season):
22-23:
Offensive rating: 120.1
Defensive rating: 98.5

23-24:
Offensive rating: 117.6
Defensive rating: 100.1

So, when accounting for all the factors that affect per 40 stats, Braden was less efficient on offense and defense. If you give him a fudge factor and say it's a wash, that counts as stagnation from year 1 to year 2.

Loyer (all season):
22-23:
Offensive rating: 110.9
Defensive rating: 104.1

23-24:
Offensive rating: 120.1
Defensive rating: 106.1

Loyer improved very nicely on the offensive side but got worse on defense, where he remains a major liability. So I would also count that as essentially a wash - stagnant.

More importantly, to answer your question, I'm not surprised by any of this, and I like them both as players, particularly Braden. They'll both be all-time Purdue greats when they hang up their jerseys. They are both poised to make a huge jump next year or the year after.

For the past two years, my point with them has been that we had a generational talent in Zach and needed to pair him with some physical upperclassmen wings to maximize our chances in March. We didn't do that, and it probably cost us against UConn. Smith and Loyer play their hearts out but they just need a few more years to mature.

 

[boilerzz]

Loyer improved very nicely on the offensive side but got worse on defense, where he remains a major liability. So I would also count that as essentially a wash - stagnant.

10 points better on offense and 2 points worse on defense = wash in your eyes.

That tells me all I need to know.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

You make a big deal about their per 40 over the season - trying to slice and dice for differences (hard to do, which has been my point since my original comment).

But you left out their efficiency numbers, which account for tempo, minutes played, etc:

Smith (all season):
22-23:
Offensive rating: 120.1
Defensive rating: 98.5

23-24:
Offensive rating: 117.6
Defensive rating: 100.1

So, when accounting for all the factors that affect per 40 stats, Braden was less efficient on offense and defense. If you give him a fudge factor and say it's a wash, that counts as stagnation from year 1 to year 2.

Loyer (all season):
22-23:
Offensive rating: 110.9
Defensive rating: 104.1

23-24:
Offensive rating: 120.1
Defensive rating: 106.1

Loyer improved very nicely on the offensive side but got worse on defense, where he remains a major liability. So I would also count that as essentially a wash - stagnant.

More importantly, to answer your question, I'm not surprised by any of this, and I like them both as players, particularly Braden. They'll both be all-time Purdue greats when they hang up their jerseys. They are both poised to make a huge jump next year or the year after.

For the past two years, my point with them has been that we had a generational talent in Zach and needed to pair him with some physical upperclassmen wings to maximize our chances in March. We didn't do that, and it probably cost us against UConn. Smith and Loyer play their hearts out but they just need a few more years to mature.

I think picking out conference games isn’t the best indication because those teams are ones more familiar with their games and Purdue more than non conf. Teams.

You can say they were less efficient but could it have been the addition of Lance and the improvement of Gillis from 3, more mins from TKR and the addition of Colvin and Heide being more in the mix than Morton and Furst? Therefore, they weren’t scoring as much or had the need to do as much as the first year?

Lance - ORtg: 94.3 -> 112.6 , DRtg: 95.5-> 112.6
Gillis - ORtg: 124.2-> 137.4, DRtg: 100.5->105.7
TKR - ORtg: 111.2 -> 116.9, DRtg: 99.6 -> 103.1
Heide - ORtg: 138.9, DRtg: 104.5
Colvin - ORtg: 111.3, DRtg: 104.6

And this doesn’t count the fact Zach’s ORtg was 130.2 -> 135 and DRtg 93.6 -> 97.2

And lastly, by your standards the following players were stagnant this year:

Kolek, Shead, Cryer, Kalkbrenner, Knecht, Dickinson, and Caitlin Clark

 

[TwinDegrees2]

What does that look like for Loyer?

Loyer starts...Heide will play more minutes and Colvin still needs to play better defense to get major minutes with talent returning and new talent coming .

As someone said, Myles failed to play top level competition in HS and AAU which hurt him a lot and basically put him a full year's development behind.

I'd love to see him be the huge surprise this season.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

Loyer starts...Heide will play more minutes and Colvin still needs to play better defense to get major minutes with talent returning and new talent coming .

As someone said, Myles failed to play top level competition in HS and AAU which hurt him a lot and basically put him a full year's development behind.

I'd love to see him be the huge surprise this season.

I think you may be the only one surprised by him, as we all expect him to be a huge part of the game plan and play a good amount of minutes.

 

[bonefish1]

Lance: Way better than expected. Don't get to the FF without him.
Smith: exceeded expectations.
Loyer: hot and cold. His strengths and weaknesses are clear and likely won't change.
Colvin/Heide: expected them to get more PT. Heide will be really, really good. Colvin more of a catch n shoot vs a get to the rim type.
Morton: as predicted.
TKR: was hoping to see his outside perimeter game develop but he's definitely a low post bully ball player. Unbelievable work on the glass in the last 8 games or so. Rodman-like.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

Lance: Way better than expected. Don't get to the FF without him.
Smith: exceeded expectations.
Loyer: hot and cold. His strengths and weaknesses are clear and likely won't change.
Colvin/Heide: expected them to get more PT. Heide will be really, really good. Colvin more of a catch n shoot vs a get to the rim type.
Morton: as predicted.
TKR: was hoping to see his outside perimeter game develop but he's definitely a low post bully ball player. Unbelievable work on the glass in the last 8 games or so. Rodman-like.

I think we will see some perimeter game from TKR this coming year!

 

[Boiler Buck]

I think we will see some perimeter game from TKR this coming year!

Doubtful. His game is mostly underneath. Might take a 3 here & there. But not going to be his game

 

[titaniumbolt]

I think picking out conference games isn’t the best indication because those teams are ones more familiar with their games and Purdue more than non conf. Teams.

I didn't pick out conference games - my last post was for all games.

You can say they were less efficient but could it have been the addition of Lance and the improvement of Gillis from 3, more mins from TKR and the addition of Colvin and Heide being more in the mix than Morton and Furst? Therefore, they weren’t scoring as much or had the need to do as much as the first year?

Lance - ORtg: 94.3 -> 112.6 , DRtg: 95.5-> 112.6
Gillis - ORtg: 124.2-> 137.4, DRtg: 100.5->105.7
TKR - ORtg: 111.2 -> 116.9, DRtg: 99.6 -> 103.1
Heide - ORtg: 138.9, DRtg: 104.5
Colvin - ORtg: 111.3, DRtg: 104.6

And this doesn’t count the fact Zach’s ORtg was 130.2 -> 135 and DRtg 93.6 -> 97.2

Read up on how efficiency is calculated. The addition of Lance and the improvement of Gillis would help, not hinder, the ratings for our wings. The same goes for the other players.

And lastly, by your standards the following players were stagnant this year:

Kolek, Shead, Cryer, Kalkbrenner, Knecht, Dickinson, and Caitlin Clark

The point I have been making for the past 2+ years is we needed older, physical wings to complement our young guards as they developed over 4 years. We didn't have enough firepower at the position, and developing frosh/sophomores will take time. This upcoming year will be a great stable for us, but it's too late for ZE.

Citing random players - including ones who aren't wings (unless you are citing the James Madison powerhouse wing Leslie Dickinson) - is more of a shifting goalposts tactic than addressing my point.

Even so, I'll entertain it. Some, not all, of the players you cited prove my point about player development.

For example - Shead has always been a confident defender - better than our guards - but steadily improved his offensive game over 4 years. Very comparable to what E'Twaun did for us. Can you imagine a player like E'Twaun on last year's team to complement our underclassmen and Lance?

Clark went the other way - she was a defensive liability and tightened up on D, incredibly doing so as an underclassman. But she wasn't done - she then steadily improved her offense as an upperclassman while keeping the D tight. If you think Clark was stagnant from her frosh year to her senior year, I have some swamp land to sell you.

Kalkbrenner has always been a slightly above-average defender while remaining in a different stratosphere offensively. Even so, he still improved from frosh to soph seasons without slipping defensively. Our guards can't say the same.

Knecht would never play at Purdue, so not sure why he even matters - that being said, he isn't as efficient as people think he is. His comparable is Carsen - feast or famine, but good God the feasting can be delicious. Not sure if he is really what this team needed. We needed burly wings who could stop on D and help control the tempo. Hurley said it perfectly through his Cheshire cat grin at his halftime interview - UConn was controlling the tempo and, in doing so, neutralized everyone on our team (even ZE to a degree).

Dickinson is...not a wing?

 

[northside100]

Lance: Way better than expected. Don't get to the FF without him.
Smith: exceeded expectations.
Loyer: hot and cold. His strengths and weaknesses are clear and likely won't change.
Colvin/Heide: expected them to get more PT. Heide will be really, really good. Colvin more of a catch n shoot vs a get to the rim type.
Morton: as predicted.
TKR: was hoping to see his outside perimeter game develop but he's definitely a low post bully ball player. Unbelievable work on the glass in the last 8 games or so. Rodman-like.

Painter?

 

[northside100]

Doubtful. How s game is mostly underneath. Might take a 3 here & there. But not going to be his game

Certainly fewer than 100 attempts on the year, maybe 50?

 

[pboiler18]

Certainly fewer than 100 attempts on the year, maybe 50?

Less. Only so many minutes and shots to go around.

The Painter formula has always been get the most efficient shots for that player in their spots vs having worse shooters jack up 3s they should t be taking.

 

[Boiler Buck]

Certainly fewer than 100 attempts on the year, maybe 50?

Less than 1/game imo

 

[northside100]

Less. Only so many minutes and shots to go around.

The Painter formula has always been get the most efficient shots for that player in their spots vs having worse shooters jack up 3s they should t be taking.

Agree on approach. IMO it will depend on how he shoots it and where he's playing. Agree that they won't be running stuff for him on the outside but 1) I don't think it's outlandish to think that he could potentially shoot in the high 30's if he's getting open looks and 2) getting more than one attempt a game would require that he comes out of the blocks.