Coach Doesn’t Need To Go But He Does Need To Change

[BoilerDeac]

RIGHT ON CUE ! FIRE PAINTER !!

Yep! There’s not even a debate now. Just had the most pathetic 3-year stretch in college hoops history.

Fire Painter, but you’re too indoctrinated and brainwashed to understand that you (and the Purdue administration) are run by fear.

You are not even conscious of your own programming and you continue to be on autopilot, and you’ll likely continue to be for the rest of your life. You’re a puppet.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Yep! There’s not even a debate now. Just had the most pathetic 3-year stretch in college hoops history.

Fire Painter, but you’re too indoctrinated and brainwashed to see.

Or, I don’t have my head up my backside like you and the rest of the delusionists.

 

[Dryfly88]

I don't know that he didn't know how to do it. I imagine he understood i through Basil and then tweaked it in how he thought he could use it. He spent a lot of time with Basil who was known for his 2-3. IMO, I thought it was too stretched, but know his thinking with the length. Bruce really shred it on the short corner with it being spread. I did not like the way the 2-3 played the triggerman and I could see an asst coach go to the head coach to set up the baseline shot that was open due to how AJ was playing the in the North Florida loss.

My point was not get into discussion about zones versus man, but I was a bit taken back that people don't remember that he tried to play a zone before...let alone some specific problems with it. If people want him to play it now...they are entitled to that. I just wanted to clear up a misconception that he has considered and actually played some zone for a few games and actually was in the Indy press because they considered it something newsworthy for readers

There is no misconception. Anyone that watched his press conference earlier this year knows he has "tried" a zone years ago. He referenced that in the presser. He tried to make a joke and said "maybe I just don't know how to teach it". He went on to lecture the reporter who asked the question why he doesn't try it. He told them the B1G is a MTM league and that's how you win conference titles. What he failed to give a history lesson on was how futile the B1G has been for 20+ years in March.

I like CMP and have never said otherwise. However he has a huge weakness in his unwillingness to acknowledge that there is more than one way to play on the defensive end. I would go as far as to say it isn't just about the defensive end, it's about how predictable we are on both ends. I have said many times on here that the B1G is not a good preparation for March. Anyone that watches other conferences sees the differences. I would love to see him admit that and make a change (which is the subject of this thread). Giving something a try 9 years ago for a couple games is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about an honest effort to have a plan B when your Plan A isn't working. We absolutely do not have that right now.

 

[SCBoiler1]

I said this last year and I believe it was true to a lesser extent this year, but in my opinion Painter tends to play it to safe.

Going into last year Painter determined Trevion and Edey couldn't play together. What I never understood is how you can give up on not having two of your best 3 players on the court together before the season even started. He also decided to start IT over Hunter. Maube IT was better in practice but did anyone really believe he was a better long term solution then Hunter? Hunter then struggled in his back up role before regaining his confidence as a starter near the end of the year. I trust that Painter thought the combinations he put together at the beginning of the year gave us the best chance to win on November 15, but it seems to me like he was limiting our upside potential.

Coming into this year I believed (and still do) that 3 of our top 5 guys most natural position is the 4. Instead of experimenting with different combinations we basically had Gillis, Furst and TKR splitting 50 minutes, with guys like Morton and Waddell starting the season splitting 40 minutes at the 3. I'll also add did anyone really believe that Morton was going to be as good as the RS freshman Newman? Again, Painter chose to "play it safe" because he probably thought it gave us the best chance to win in November but to me he wasn't playing the long game trying to make Purdue the best team is could be come March.

 

[tjreese]

There is no misconception. Anyone that watched his press conference earlier this year knows he has "tried" a zone years ago. He referenced that in the presser. He tried to make a joke and said "maybe I just don't know how to teach it". He went on to lecture the reporter who asked the question why he doesn't try it. He told them the B1G is a MTM league and that's how you win conference titles. What he failed to give a history lesson on was how futile the B1G has been for 20+ years in March.

I like CMP and have never said otherwise. However he has a huge weakness in his unwillingness to acknowledge that there is more than one way to play on the defensive end. I would go as far as to say it isn't just about the defensive end, it's about how predictable we are on both ends. I have said many times on here that the B1G is not a good preparation for March. Anyone that watches other conferences sees the differences. I would love to see him admit that and make a change (which is the subject of this thread). Giving something a try 9 years ago for a couple games is not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about an honest effort to have a plan B when your Plan A isn't working. We absolutely do not have that right now.

I never saw the presser and had no idea he referenced it. I'm guessing that somebody must have asked him about a zone for him to bring it up? Here is what close to 100% of the fans don't understand...there are no solutions. Everything that could be tried gives up something. What does he want to give up and is it the same the fans want to give up? Even inside the many adjustments that take place in a game that are very minor and not readily seen by anyone may help or hurt.

I'm guessing that a concern you had with the D was dribble containment or at least that is what I interpreted. It was a concern of mine as well...and will be a concern years from now until a shift is made from less skill to athleticism and even then there is going to be concerns in how much pressure you apply and can you shoot the ball...not that Purdue has shooters today. If you just scan the MANY things typed on both forums it is easy to see that the range of what everyone believes is each person's elixir to the problems as they understand them. They are all over the place, because that happens everywhere in the stands.

You can play a tight zone and stop or reduce the dribble penetration we saw. I can do the same thing in man as you alluded to in sagging. Whether man or zone if we pull tighter to the lane, we now give up the 3 ball in either.

If I have somehow left you with an impression I didn't think you were fond of Matt...my apologies since I have never thought that, but if you did...that is your right as well. There is a lot of basketball that remains the same from pre high school to high school to college, but things that "work" well at one level may not work as well at another level. Lastly, none of us really know how much leeway Matt gives to Paul Lusk on D and Terry Johnson on O. I'm sure Matt should and does interject if he sees an approach straying from his desires and that all three are on the same page most if not all the time. Anyway, most if not all of us want Purdue to do better in the tourney...obviously with different levels of passion. Probably a more sane discussion would happen in June or July in the forums...

 

[Dryfly88]

I never saw the presser and had no idea he referenced it. I'm guessing that somebody must have asked him about a zone for him to bring it up? Here is what close to 100% of the fans don't understand...there are no solutions. Everything that could be tried gives up something. What does he want to give up and is it the same the fans want to give up? Even inside the many adjustments that take place in a game that are very minor and not readily seen by anyone may help or hurt.

I'm guessing that a concern you had with the D was dribble containment or at least that is what I interpreted. It was a concern of mine as well...and will be a concern years from now until a shift is made from less skill to athleticism and even then there is going to be concerns in how much pressure you apply and can you shoot the ball...not that Purdue has shooters today. If you just scan the MANY things typed on both forums it is easy to see that the range of what everyone believes is each person's elixir to the problems as they understand them. They are all over the place, because that happens everywhere in the stands.

You can play a tight zone and stop or reduce the dribble penetration we saw. I can do the same thing in man as you alluded to in sagging. Whether man or zone if we pull tighter to the lane, we now give up the 3 ball in either.

If I have somehow left you with an impression I didn't think you were fond of Matt...my apologies since I have never thought that, but if you did...that is your right as well. There is a lot of basketball that remains the same from pre high school to high school to college, but things that "work" well at one level may not work as well at another level. Lastly, none of us really know how much leeway Matt gives to Paul Lusk on D and Terry Johnson on O. I'm sure Matt should and does interject if he sees an approach straying from his desires and that all three are on the same page most if not all the time. Anyway, most if not all of us want Purdue to do better in the tourney...obviously with different levels of passion. Probably a more sane discussion would happen in June or July in the forums...

He was asked by the reporter why he didn't play zone. He was pretty dismissive and gave the weak answer about B1G being a MTM league.

I'm not aware of anyone on here (including myself) that have suggested playing a zone is a guarantee of success on any given possession. There is no such thing obviously, or a team could hold the opponent to zero for the game. What it does do, is force the other team to adapt to what you are doing. Even if for a couple of possessions and sometimes that is all that is needed. The suggestion would be to use it when our primary MTM is not being effective. So some games it wouldn't be used at all. Other games maybe a handful of possessions. It's not a novel concept. Many coaches outside of the B1G do it routinely. Coach K and Self are/were very much MTM guys but they used different zones through the years when they wanted to give a different look.

Yes, I was mainly concerned Friday night with the dribble penetration and Zach trying to cover a 3 point shooter 20+ feet from the basket when they ran 5 out.

My hope is CMP does a self-evaluation and at least tries to give some variety to both the defense and the offense. I mean that whether Edey comes back or not.

 

[lucky 53]

As a former purdue rose bowl player, I am amazed that all of our "experts on this board that talk about how painter needs to up his game in the portal don't realize that NIL is the king of recruiting...
Unless these experts are ready to drop $ in the pot they are speaking out of their butts...the guard from Kansas state was ready to come to purdue until Miami gave him 800,ooo reasons to go there
...can purdue adjust aspects of its game ..absolutely...but purdue is not going to get either Football or Basketball transfers because it is a great institution
...