Interesting in that I never counted his dribbles, but have reference before that Myles and C am should be capable of two dribbles and that should take them inside the lane where they "should" be able to elevate for a soft shot. I mean that was pretty common a few years ago...
They were quicker, dominated the boards and had length which tells about their athleticism. They can shoot and dribble which tells about their skill. They were much older which tells about their physical maturity and experience. Myles and Cam have not shown the ability to dribble the ball when defended from a triple threat position. Can they dribble if catching off a screen, diving if setting a screen or slipping if previous screens pulled the D in anticipation? How many dribbles are needed to get inside the lane and score? Sure they are what they are right now assuming them not doing such is due to their lack of confidence or ability. Purdue has them THIS year. Can Purdue help them become scorers and more involved in the offense NOW? There is plenty of time to see if any growth takes place in different players before the season ends. Personally, I think Purdue can help them hide what appears to be an inability to drive the ball when starting from dead stop.
Yes, we have agreed on this before. We run the play, and Heide or Colvin get to the spot, and if open, they shoot the three, and if not, they keep making the quick pass. It is here where they need to do what you suggest. Either fake the shot or fake the pass and get past the defender to go for a layup or a jump shot. Loyer is the only one who consistently does this, but the other should also.
Well sure they can get better, but handles need all summer to improve. We discussed just a few dribbles to get to a closer spot for a jump shot or I suggested the Loyer floater. We’ll see if Painter allows or coaches them to do so. For that matter TKR not always turning his back to the basket, rather sometimes turning and shooting a face up jump shot. I know he can do it. Prevent the defense from knowing exactly what he will do.
The 5 man for Purdue rarely faces up. It seems they try to specialize on a jump hook...which is almost indefensible when "getting where they want". Haarms and Biggie would go outside and shoot some, but that is about it for a 5 man. JJ would shoot mid range shots a lot. Here is what I don't know...and we all know some weaknesses of Berg, but in video (and we know video is not game conditions) seems to shoot well behind the arc. Is he possible to exploit that enough to offset some other things? No idea...
IMO mindset comes from confidence which comes from success. Coaches stressing the need to get in the lane...coaches putting them in positions to get in the lane and a willingness to ride a few misses might grow that mindset of "wanting" to be an active scorer, but being an active participant. Confidence is a hard thing to grow for some, but absolutely valuable. Sometimes it seems to be a relationship between being a thinker and fearing risk
Well losing Jacobson kind of screwed up things this year too. It was going to be tough even with him. So without others really need to have a breakout season.
Smith has proven he can create his own shot. But Auburns much longer athletic guys kept guarding Smith and it made it hard. You won't find dudes like that in the Big Ten.
I can agree with that. We’ve got a small ball lineup but this sure isn’t the type of offense a small ball lineup would run.
Penn State??? What about UCLA, MSU, Oregon??
Cannot agree with this more. The number of times our sets get completely shut down because tkr gets fronted in the half court has been nauseating. I don’t get what the plan is. Although, it was nice to see smith place a defender on an island and less of the pick n roll that just gets hard hedged to death these days
He's taken plenty of big shots over the 3 years where he's had to create late a shot clock. Sometimes the defense is better. To say he can't do it is just inaccurate. He's proven often that he can.
You are taking a small fraction of his shots and creating something larger than reality.
Let me ask you since you are a true IU fan. Did you really believe he was a preseason B1G player of the year type of player? Without ZE.
He does have the ball all lot. Not as much as you think. He's got a usage% of 21%. He's not even close to top 25 in the nation. Those guys all are 31+%. Heck, Trevion had a 37% usage% in 20-21. But Smith isn't going to see the same type of defense anymore in the B1G. Marquette has those guards. Penn St has Baldwin. Auburn kept switching their wings out on him and even Auburns center was able to stay in front. But it's wild to believe Smith can't create his own shot when he's proved he can ever since showing up on campus. It is probably tougher now, but that was expected with Edey being gone. Purdue doesn't have the same kind of relief and Smith no longer has a guy and he can just throw up in the air to.
The "short shot clock" has been in effect since 2015. Not a coach in the country that hasn't adapted to it. Should have zero impact on how a team runs their offense now. It was 35 seconds for years prior to that. I could see where maybe in the first couple of years some coaches would have to change or adapt their offense to a shorter shot clock. But not 9 years later.since my thoughts have been expressed in the original game thread to @qazplm , I'll just copy and paste to add my $.01.
No, I haven't either. What I can't do is state for certainty that they can't (physically incapable )versus won't (mentally lacking confidence) versus shouldn't (inside a set that generally places them farther down the options in what they should do). This is where a conversation could quickly point to a short shot clock and how it affects motion (better with longer clock) versus a set (a counter to a short clock) under the "team" type offense where motion is only mostly player scouted and sets being more scripted than motion has the set and player within the script scouted. What the shorter clock has done is force teams to attempt a shot relatively quick since the clock is playing D as well as the other team. This naturally leans to the quicker more athletic defender and offensive player which leans to more to offensive players "needing" to be able to score more as an individual. Consequently, the individual player's value is enhanced. The sport for "most" is entertainment value and most people like the track star qualities over the basketball "team" skills many times not noticed and so the rules have followed that line of thought I believe.
Now, I do expect Myles and Cam to grow as players and get "more" capable to "breaking down" the D sometime at Purdue, but that has NOT been their experience at Purdue. Myles is in his first year of playing much and Cam is getting many more minutes as well. Neither last year needed to break down the D since Zach was the "closer" if the clock was winding down and so BOTH have no experience to draw upon in the roles they now have and when you throw in the freshmen...there is a lot of inexperience Purdue relies upon. A couple of years ago it was Jaden that was the closer as the clock was winding down, but soon became the closer when the clock was NOT winding down.
What about this year? Obviously, Purdue needs more out of Myles and Cam offensively. I suspect neither worked on their dribbling near as much as shooting (over the summer) and that was probably almost all catch and shoot and as we have seen teams load up on defending Braden and trying to keep Trey from getting the ball on short drives...and then trying to run Fletch, Myles and Cam off the 3 pt line where only Fletcher has put the ball on the deck...as you and others know.
This is where maybe not depending on them to attack pressure individually should take a backset and just incorporate them into a set as an earlier option where they may get an open look or at least need fewer dribbling to get in scoring range? Or could add motion to more screens (of similar player size that allows more dives, slips and generally more action even if maybe not getting the physical size difference in the screening of a 5 for a 1. Purdue needs to get more offense out of them.
Perhaps this is a time where Matt takes one or both out of the starting lineup and perhaps goes smaller with CJ on the court more and/or Burgess or Berg getting more minutes which if were to happen would most likely see Burgess I'm guessing. Both offer growing pains, but could the pains be short in duration? I have to believe that we see some things different in the next game, but what they will be...who knows? Hopefully, some of that is getting Myles and Cam involved in the offense in ways that their usage is not just a late option behind the arc or an early if open in transition behind the arc.
Thanks for clarifying usage means nothing to the equation of winning. To think you labeled TW as part of your argument is just laughable.
comment was nothing about whether a coach could or should adapt. The comment is what it has done to greater team play versus greater individual play...how it may affect motion and enhance quick hitters or sets. It laid out the why Matt's more team players find more success at Purdue than in other offenses should they went elsewhere as well as the pros and cons. I believe it was a larger influence in eliminating some areas of the game and enhancing other areas than the 3 pt shot. It states how Matt has tried to adapt from years ago and how that is more scoutable than motion. It is a philosophical difference "relative" to how many other coaches try to work within the shorter clock. There would have been a hell of an advantage for Purdue had the clock been 45 seconds the last few years as opposed to 30 and even 35 would have been a boost.
Your argument is more what style of play do you prefer to watch. One could argue that the "shorter" clock makes a team get into their offense quicker and puts an emphasis on precision and discipline and getting the shot you want quicker. The longer the clock, the more a team can "waste" time getting set and trying to get the shot they want.
