Criteria for who should get minutes

[boilerzz]

I'm sure I'll forget a few on the coaches side but seems like I've pretty much got it covered for some fans.

Fans:
Points
Shooting Percentage
On Ball Defense
Athleticism


Coaches:
Points
Shooting percentage
On ball defense
Chemistry with other players
Understanding of offensive game plan
Execution of offensive game plan
Understanding of defensive principles
Execution of defensive principles
Trust to follow the game plan
Understanding of role on the team when in the game
Hustle and effort
Willingness to rebound with max effort
Willingness to sacrifice body defensively
Advanced metrics
Post feed ability
Perceived intangibles through significant interaction
Understanding of when to pass vs when to shoot
Willingness to pass up a good shot for a great shot
Willingness to take big shots
Game experience
System experience

What did I miss?

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

I'm sure I'll forget a few on the coaches side but seems like I've pretty much got it covered for some fans.

Fans:
Points
Shooting Percentage
On Ball Defense
Athleticism


Coaches:
Points
Shooting percentage
On ball defense
Chemistry with other players
Understanding of offensive game plan
Execution of offensive game plan
Understanding of defensive principles
Execution of defensive principles
Trust to follow the game plan
Understanding of role on the team when in the game
Hustle and effort
Willingness to rebound with max effort
Willingness to sacrifice body defensively
Advanced metrics
Post feed ability
Perceived intangibles through significant interaction
Understanding of when to pass vs when to shoot
Willingness to pass up a good shot for a great shot
Willingness to take big shots
Game experience
System experience

What did I miss?

Your list for coaches is far too long and wrong. It’s clearly what the fans think should dictate PT 😂

 

[Steve83]

Coaches: Because I say so.

 

[BoilerAndy]

Coaches: Because I say so.

Fans: Box score

Coaches: Basketball IQ (oops!)

 

[tjreese]

I'm sure I'll forget a few on the coaches side but seems like I've pretty much got it covered for some fans.

Fans:
Points
Shooting Percentage
On Ball Defense
Athleticism


Coaches:
Points
Shooting percentage
On ball defense
Chemistry with other players
Understanding of offensive game plan
Execution of offensive game plan
Understanding of defensive principles
Execution of defensive principles
Trust to follow the game plan
Understanding of role on the team when in the game
Hustle and effort
Willingness to rebound with max effort
Willingness to sacrifice body defensively
Advanced metrics
Post feed ability
Perceived intangibles through significant interaction
Understanding of when to pass vs when to shoot
Willingness to pass up a good shot for a great shot
Willingness to take big shots
Game experience
System experience

What did I miss?

A couple more that could be added-smart decisions, quick movement of the ball and player. Correct timing of cuts and screens. Correct angle of screens...guards rebounding, but one guard is the safety back first on D. Following scouting reports, playing within himself, practicing hard so coaches know what you are capable...cerebral play on O and D and understanding who you are with and what you do best especially in that group. The biggest thing I don't believe a lot understand is just how QUICK the game goes and Matt has very limited time to make a decision in many cases because a game can be flipped in a couple of possessions against some teams.

 

[qazplm]

A couple more that could be added-smart decisions, quick movement of the ball and player. Correct timing of cuts and screens. Correct angle of screens...guards rebounding, but one guard is the safety back first on D. Following scouting reports, playing within himself, practicing hard so coaches know what you are capable...cerebral play on O and D and understanding who you are with and what you do best especially in that group. The biggest thing I don't believe a lot understand is just how QUICK the game goes and Matt has very limited time to make a decision in many cases because a game can be flipped in a couple of possessions against some teams.

It's a sports message board. I'll never understand why people get upset because someone second guessed a coach on a sports message board. Yeah, the coach is probably right most of the time, so what?

And sometimes, they aren't. But if doesn't matter because it's a sports message board where fans talk about their team. It's not a performance review nor is it a masters thesis. It's fans on a message board.

 

[tjreese]

It's a sports message board. I'll never understand why people get upset because someone second guessed a coach on a sports message board. Yeah, the coach is probably right most of the time, so what?

And sometimes, they aren't. But if doesn't matter because it's a sports message board where fans talk about their team. It's not a performance review nor is it a masters thesis. It's fans on a message board.

I get that, but sometimes it gets a bit out there. I think when people state their views and explain why it helps others, but in no way would I expect agreement on most things...and if there was total agreement, then there isn't enough thought going on. where it gets bad is when someone states an absolute that Matt should do this or that without any backing of substance as to why they hold the opinion they do

 

[boilerzz]

I get that, but sometimes it gets a bit out there. I think when people state their views and explain why it helps others, but in no way would I expect agreement on most things...and if there was total agreement, then there isn't enough thought going on. where it gets bad is when someone states an absolute that Matt should do this or that without any backing of substance as to why they hold the opinion they do

Exactly. It's one thing to say "I think Colvin should get more minutes" and completely another to say "Painter is to stupid for giving Morton and Loyer minutes and not playing Colvin". And the latter is posted often.

 

[Schmedly_Whiplash]

Coaches: Because I say so.

no. he just posted the reasons coaches make the decisions they do.
Some fans aren't able to discern enough to make it worth the time to go into detail.

 

[qazplm]

I get that, but sometimes it gets a bit out there. I think when people state their views and explain why it helps others, but in no way would I expect agreement on most things...and if there was total agreement, then there isn't enough thought going on. where it gets bad is when someone states an absolute that Matt should do this or that without any backing of substance as to why they hold the opinion they do

Except Matt isn't reading the board. It's a message board on the internet. If someone says something stupid then either ignore it or point out why it's stupid. It could have all the substance in the world, some substance or zero substance, it's all the same because Matt ain't reading it. No one important at the school is reading it either.

Unless it's a personal attack on a player, their family or the coaches, a bad or unsupported opinion has the same impact as a good or supported opinion. Nothing. It's just fans on a message board.

I could write a dissertation on why incorporating an occasional zone defense would be beneficial with data, well reasoned arguments and citations, and it will have the exact same impact as someone saying Matt's dumb for (almost) never incorporating a zone. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

 

[Wolegib]

I totally agree with your lists for both fans and coaches. However, I believe different coaches would place different tasks as different priorities. Some coaches love to score a lot of points. Some coaches are run and gun. Some place defense as their top priority.

I would believe most here would agree painter is a lot different than Calipari, smart and Izzo.

Looking at the coach’s list above, I believe Painter places defense as a higher priority over points scored. And with that he will recruit and play different players based on his individual priorities.

While fans love points and players who can shoot the three, it appears Painter has his own agenda! And that frustrates many fans.

Taking a page from Purdue football, there are many fans on this board that love a passing attack and scoring a lot of points. On the other hand, the Iowa coach prefers a conservative game and winning over having a pass happy offense. And a lot of Purdue fans prefer scoring points over winning!

Me personally, I prefer winning over points and highlight reel plays. I grew up in the 60’s. I don’t remember any scores. I do remember the Packers beating the Cowboys! And that’s all that mattered!

People here seem to want Painter to play Myles and Heide more. Why? Because they can score points.

I’ll just accept the win. That’s the only stat that really matters. A championship. I’ll allow Painter to make his own decisions of how to get one. If he can’t, then find someone who can.

Tony Dungy was a great coach, but Gruden is the coach that brought Tampa Bay a championship.

What is Keady’s legacy? What is Knight most remembered for? They are both HoF coaches with very different styles and personalities. If you wanted one of them to coach your Olympic team and win the gold medal, who would you choose? I believe if you were not a Purdue fan, the answer would be an easy one. If you had to choose, who would you pick? I would choose Knight. My second choice would be Rose. Rose has 2 final 4 appearances!

I don’t hate Painter. I just prefer championships over having nice regular season records.

Look at Jo Montana, Brady, Rogers, Mahorn, Marino, Manning, Elway, Unitas, Breeze and Favre. If you were going to the Super Bowl, who would you choose? And what coach would you choose?

There is no right or wrong answer. Personally, I choose the one I believe can win a championship!

 

[Wolegib]

I’m a fan. I’m not a coach. To me the #1 priority should be winning and the team. I coach an online team in a non related game. I have 30 players on my team. I choose the 20 who play. I don’t play the 20 most powerful players. I select the ones who I believe give us the best chance of winning. We won today with several of our best players grumbling they were more powerful than the ones I chose to start. My priority was not making people happy. It was based on building a winning team. We won!

 

[rjmpu82]

Geno Auriemma has some ideas. Granted, he's a women's coach, but he's been pretty successful. First thing he looks at in is players is attitude and body language. Are they happy for their teammates? Do they accept coaching? Do they accept their role on the team? He says all of his players have skills or they wouldn't be at UConn.

 

[tjreese]

Except Matt isn't reading the board. It's a message board on the internet. If someone says something stupid then either ignore it or point out why it's stupid. It could have all the substance in the world, some substance or zero substance, it's all the same because Matt ain't reading it. No one important at the school is reading it either.

Unless it's a personal attack on a player, their family or the coaches, a bad or unsupported opinion has the same impact as a good or supported opinion. Nothing. It's just fans on a message board.

I could write a dissertation on why incorporating an occasional zone defense would be beneficial with data, well reasoned arguments and citations, and it will have the exact same impact as someone saying Matt's dumb for (almost) never incorporating a zone. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

Well, I try to read as much as I can in areas of interest and even if it doesn't impact Matt it does impact those on here that like some substance, especially the reasoned arguments (those are what is needed). If you listed what you said relative to a zone it would imply you have given some thought which makes the forum more enjoyable. People don't like IU trolls or others in a similar approach and yet that isn't much different than some posts.

I'm not trying to eliminate thought, but encouraging it. My very limited exposure to some Facebook groups tells me that many are not astute. I also try to not engage in attacking someone, but there is a difference between a post with substance and one without. The first improves the forum and the second takes away from the forum. I realize everyone has a different background and understanding, but when someone makes a post of substance then the door is open for dialog and improves the forum. I'm not wanting anyone censored, but stating something as an "absolute" and Matt doesn't know is really pretty stupid. I can guarantee Matt knows the game. Is he above reproach? NO, but everyone benefits if the poster states the basketball reason why they disagree with Matt or just another poster. It takes time...I fully get that!

 

[Wolegib]

I am not so sure that Painter or members of his staff doesn’t read what is said in forums.

I am not so sure that our main benefactors /alumni also don’t read what is said in forums.

I’m not so sure media writers don’t read what is said in forums.

I could provide many examples where the media has copied word for word statements that have been made by posters in forums such as this. I can provide many examples where Painter and other coaches have provided answers as part of their media press conferences. That address areas/concerns posed by fans .

One example: we have been discussing Edey coming back to play another year on this forum. For the past two months! Painter had a press conference today saying Edey was going to turn pro. He didn’t have to announce it today! Maybe he just got tired of all the fans discussing it on forums. And maybe he just wanted to tell the fsns to stop talking about it and to stop speculating and to just shut up about it and dreaming about it. It ain’t happening and get over it!

To me, that suggests many people outside of this forum read the posts here.

 

[qazplm]

I am not so sure that Painter or members of his staff doesn’t read what is said in forums.

I am not so sure that our main benefactors /alumni also don’t read what is said in forums.

I’m not so sure media writers don’t read what is said in forums.

I could provide many examples where the media has copied word for word statements that have been made by posters in forums such as this. I can provide many examples where Painter and other coaches have provided answers as part of their media press conferences. That address areas/concerns posed by fans .

One example: we have been discussing Edey coming back to play another year on this forum. For the past two months! Painter had a press conference today saying Edey was going to turn pro. He didn’t have to announce it today! Maybe he just got tired of all the fans discussing it on forums. And maybe he just wanted to tell the fsns to stop talking about it and to stop speculating and to just shut up about it and dreaming about it. It ain’t happening and get over it!

To me, that suggests many people outside of this forum read the posts here.

That's not an example lol that's you trying to make a connection with zero evidence.

Why in the world would Painter care about speculation on a message board? I sincerely hope and trust he is way too busy to peruse one of the several (and not even the largest) Purdue message boards and get upset enough to call a press conference because someone thought maybe Edey might come back next season.

 

[BoilerAndy]

Except Matt isn't reading the board. It's a message board on the internet. If someone says something stupid then either ignore it or point out why it's stupid. It could have all the substance in the world, some substance or zero substance, it's all the same because Matt ain't reading it. No one important at the school is reading it either.

Unless it's a personal attack on a player, their family or the coaches, a bad or unsupported opinion has the same impact as a good or supported opinion. Nothing. It's just fans on a message board.

I could write a dissertation on why incorporating an occasional zone defense would be beneficial with data, well reasoned arguments and citations, and it will have the exact same impact as someone saying Matt's dumb for (almost) never incorporating a zone. Nada. Zilch. Zero.

I'll just say that if someone posts something demonstrably false or patently stupid, they should be called out for it. Including me. If someone posts, "Painter must play Player A for X minutes and limit Player B to Y minutes, or Purdue will lose in the tournament", you surely don't expect people to not disagree. Just because it's an opinion? And disagreeing with a Painter critic doesn't mean that one thinks Painter can do no wrong. Such a claim would be qualified as patently stupid.

You know, using Painter's terminology, everyone on this board is ignorant. The problem is, some people won't admit it about themselves and have convinced themselves that they know the truth. Then they somehow get offended when their "truth" is challenged.

 

[qazplm]

I'll just say that if someone posts something demonstrably false or patently stupid, they should be called out for it. Including me. If someone posts, "Painter must play Player A for X minutes and limit Player B to Y minutes, or Purdue will lose in the tournament", you surely don't expect people to not disagree. Just because it's an opinion? And disagreeing with a Painter critic doesn't mean that one thinks Painter can do no wrong. Such a claim would be qualified as patently stupid.

You know, using Painter's terminology, everyone on this board is ignorant. The problem is, some people won't admit it about themselves and have convinced themselves that they know the truth. Then they somehow get offended when their "truth" is challenged.

I mean that's literally my second sentence.
But just listing how fans know little and coaches know a lot isn't the same or nearly as useful as addressing a specific claim as right or wrong or "stupid."

 

[BoilerAndy]

I mean that's literally my second sentence.
But just listing how fans know little and coaches know a lot isn't the same or nearly as useful as addressing a specific claim as right or wrong or "stupid."

Let's say I make an absolute statement that Painter must stop being stubborn and do what I want, or Purdue will lose. I make this claim with a tiny fraction of the information that is in the hands of the coaches. I obviously am making the statement out of ignorance. But ignorance becomes stupidity when I stick to my belief after others have shared additional information that should cause me to rethink it. Some here completely ignore facts, and continue repeating something that has been proven to be unfounded. They stubbornly close their minds to the possibility that what they are saying doesn't match reality. They can't add substance to their argument, because their isn't any.

 

[SCBoiler1]

Do you not see how backward your argument is?

Fans that use stats are basing their judgements on facts. The number of points/rebounds/assists/turnover a guy gets are facts. +/- and offensive and defensive efficiency are also facts. There is no judgement it's just data. Just like any other data, it can be manipulated to support various positions and doesn't always give you the entire picture, but it is data that can be used to evaluate a player's/team's performance.

I think most fans who quote stats understand that coaches go beyond just the numbers when deciding who to play, but what I find intriguing are the fans who push for players despite what the stats are telling anyone who cares to look. In my view they have the heavier burden than the fan who relies heavily on stats. So, if stats don't matter what are you basing your judgement on? We all have confirmation bias and what we see on the court typically confirms our already held beliefs.

Believe it or not coaches have confirmation bias and guess what? Stats are one way for a coach to look at a game more objectively. Sometimes it takes losing a game before a coach reevaluates things but there are other times when guys go off (Heide) or really struggle for a coach to change their thinking.

 

[qazplm]

Let's say I make an absolute statement that Painter must stop being stubborn and do what I want, or Purdue will lose. I make this claim with a tiny fraction of the information that is in the hands of the coaches. I obviously am making the statement out of ignorance. But ignorance becomes stupidity when I stick to my belief after others have shared additional information that should cause me to rethink it. Some here completely ignore facts, and continue repeating something that has been proven to be unfounded. They stubbornly close their minds to the possibility that what they are saying doesn't match reality. They can't add substance to their argument, because their isn't any.

Oh no, people are wrong on the internet!!

 

[Boiler Buck]

It's a sports message board. I'll never understand why people get upset because someone second guessed a coach on a sports message board. Yeah, the coach is probably right most of the time, so what?

And sometimes, they aren't. But if doesn't matter because it's a sports message board where fans talk about their team. It's not a performance review nor is it a masters thesis. It's fans on a message board.

Exactly.

But some like to think they are smarter and more in the know than others. Gives them a sense of importance. Getting upset, arrogant or nasty allows them to show off their "superior" knowledge....they think. While some do have more knowledge, I simply wish they wouldn't be absolute jerk wads about it. Most here are Boiler fans, I just wish some particular people would be much more respectful of other Boilers. Unless they are an iu fan then all bets are off. Lol

 

[BoilerAndy]

Oh no, people are wrong on the internet!!

Oh no, other people on the internet are pointing it out.

 

[tjreese]

Do you not see how backward your argument is?

Fans that use stats are basing their judgements on facts. The number of points/rebounds/assists/turnover a guy gets are facts. +/- and offensive and defensive efficiency are also facts. There is no judgement it's just data. Just like any other data, it can be manipulated to support various positions and doesn't always give you the entire picture, but it is data that can be used to evaluate a player's/team's performance.

I think most fans who quote stats understand that coaches go beyond just the numbers when deciding who to play, but what I find intriguing are the fans who push for players despite what the stats are telling anyone who cares to look. In my view they have the heavier burden than the fan who relies heavily on stats. So, if stats don't matter what are you basing your judgement on? We all have confirmation bias and what we see on the court typically confirms our already held beliefs.

Believe it or not coaches have confirmation bias and guess what? Stats are one way for a coach to look at a game more objectively. Sometimes it takes losing a game before a coach reevaluates things but there are other times when guys go off (Heide) or really struggle for a coach to change their thinking.

I can agree with a lot you write. Data is good, but data has its' own internal bias sometimes...as does no data. On a larger scale some may like the AP ranking in however the voters decide. It has its own internal eye test bias as well as an unethical bias based upon preference of ranking rather than an honest eye test. The Net has it's own bias due to the metrics used in its math for some comparison of strengths and such, but the internal errors are free of preferential treatment as the season goes on and so the error doesn't change over the season on purpose.

Where I disagree with some is that I think a coach helps dictate data that may be confounded inside a personal data metric. As an example a player may be the 4th option in a set where the clock is winding down and may now have a poorer look than the second option that was not chosen. Another example could be which guard is more often than not getting in the center of the court to be on D on a shot while another guard is rebounding as another quick example. Last year required Braden to absorb the D pressure while Zach was on the blocks. This year Braden can attack the glass or hit a mid range shot. Before this year there wasn't a desire to shoot the mid range shot. However, we are seeing more teams take them because it is a common soft spot in the D if you can make them.

Sometimes we see one single lump of data that may actually be bimodal or have several populations. If you use data early in the year and it is different than data later in the year, you will not only have more variation as a result, but perhaps an inaccurate use of data if the current is much different than the previous, but then again is that data difference due to better competition? Unfortunately, many uses of data may not be accurate in players or NCAA seeding if a team is on a hot streak.

So even though there may be bias with data from a lot of directions it has substance. Substance can also happen through logic of various basketball theory on its own as well as inside a particular team. All these provide substance and all these allow for meaningful dialog while enhancing the forum IMO

 

[qazplm]

Oh no, other people on the internet are pointing it out.

No, you aren't just pointing it out, which I have said multiple times is just fine. You're whining about it. Starting whole generic threads basically saying "coaches smart, fans dumb." And just generally getting upset because someone even dared to think something mildly critical of Painter or players.

 

[qazplm]

Exactly.

But some like to think they are smarter and more in the know than others. Gives them a sense of importance. Getting upset, arrogant or nasty allows them to show off their "superior" knowledge....they think. While some do have more knowledge, I simply wish they wouldn't be absolute jerk wads about it. Most here are Boiler fans, I just wish some particular people would be much more respectful of other Boilers. Unless they are an iu fan then all bets are off. Lol

Not just knowledge, but fandom. Look at what a better fan I am than you. Look at how I support the coaches and players no matter what. No one here says anything that affects anything. Nothing said here changes anything. It's a bunch of fans on a message board. That's it.

 

[Schmedly_Whiplash]

It's a sports message board. I'll never understand why people get upset because someone second guessed a coach on a sports message board. Yeah, the coach is probably right most of the time, so what?

And sometimes, they aren't. But if doesn't matter because it's a sports message board where fans talk about their team. It's not a performance review nor is it a masters thesis. It's fans on a message board.

Yeh but there are a lot of fans that don't know much, but have loud voices. So when they slam one of the best coaches in the game, while frequently not knowing their ass from a hole in the ground, some here will get defensive about it .

 

[Boiler Buck]

I can agree with a lot you write. Data is good, but data has its' own internal bias sometimes...as does no data. On a larger scale some may like the AP ranking in however the voters decide. It has its own internal eye test bias as well as an unethical bias based upon preference of ranking rather than an honest eye test. The Net has it's own bias due to the metrics used in its math for some comparison of strengths and such, but the internal errors are free of preferential treatment as the season goes on and so the error doesn't change over the season on purpose.

Where I disagree with some is that I think a coach helps dictate data that may be confounded inside a personal data metric. As an example a player may be the 4th option in a set where the clock is winding down and may now have a poorer look than the second option that was not chosen. Another example could be which guard is more often than not getting in the center of the court to be on D on a shot while another guard is rebounding as another quick example. Last year required Braden to absorb the D pressure while Zach was on the blocks. This year Braden can attack the glass or hit a mid range shot. Before this year there wasn't a desire to shoot the mid range shot. However, we are seeing more teams take them because it is a common soft spot in the D if you can make them.

Sometimes we see one single lump of data that may actually be bimodal or have several populations. If you use data early in the year and it is different than data later in the year, you will not only have more variation as a result, but perhaps an inaccurate use of data if the current is much different than the previous, but then again is that data difference due to better competition? Unfortunately, many uses of data may not be accurate in players or NCAA seeding if a team is on a hot streak.

So even though there may be bias with data from a lot of directions it has substance. Substance can also happen through logic of various basketball theory on its own as well as inside a particular team. All these provide substance and all these allow for meaningful dialog while enhancing the forum IMO

I want to thank you for setting a great example of how to disagree respectfully and generate positive discussion with fellow Boilers. You never come off arrogant and your posts are a pleasure to read. Well done.

 

[Boiler79]

It's a message board. Let people fan how they want to fan. It's not that deep.

 

[tjreese]

I want to thank you for setting a great example of how to disagree respectfully and generate positive discussion with fellow Boilers. You never come off arrogant and your posts are a pleasure to read. Well done.

Thank you, that was kind. I probably write too much, but enjoy talking about the game. I just think that if people attack the message rather than the person, things go a bit smoother. Everybody here comes to the forum with different experiences, different backgrounds and expertise in different things. Most have some common base with the University and so we share a lot. I have changed a bit through the years as far as any "personal" pain a loss might have contributed to many years ago.

Pitfalls in life have a way of helping you prioritize more correctly and we all have our battles at some time. Many times those battles have nothing to do with your actions. Adapting to those changes usually takes place in one of two ways. You can hold steadfast to some thoughts that may not be beneficial to you and life will start chipping away at you to shape you as you lose a bit of who you were. The other approach is to be more malleable and changing shape as needed and not losing pieces. It is important to realize that people are not bad if they disagree with you and most important to NOT seek approval from others to define who you are. I truly believe that the most opposed some are to each other could find some enjoyment with each. Anyway, thank you and I believe we have a lot of good people that post in the forum.

 

[qazplm]

Yeh but there are a lot of fans that don't know much, but have loud voices. So when they slam one of the best coaches in the game, while frequently not knowing their ass from a hole in the ground, some here will get defensive about it .

Well the problem is also some folks think no one can criticize one of the best coaches in the game, but again so what?

If it's stupid, why get defensive about it?

 

[BoilerAndy]

No, you aren't just pointing it out, which I have said multiple times is just fine. You're whining about it. Starting whole generic threads basically saying "coaches smart, fans dumb." And just generally getting upset because someone even dared to think something mildly critical of Painter or players.

What thread did I start? Please provide a link. Don't waste your time. You are too emotional about this. I can't imagine going through this season so petrified with fear that Purdue won't reach the FF, that I can't enjoy what is happening.

 

[qazplm]

What thread did I start? Please provide a link. Don't waste your time. You are too emotional about this. I can't imagine going through this season so petrified with fear that Purdue won't reach the FF, that I can't enjoy what is happening.

LOL You are always consistent in trying to turn whatever I'm saying around to me being emotional or a bad fan. I'll give you credit for consistency. Accuracy way off, but you never miss your chance.

 

[BoilerAndy]

LOL You are always consistent in trying to turn whatever I'm saying around to me being emotional or a bad fan. I'll give you credit for consistency. Accuracy way off, but you never miss your chance.

Bad fan? Where do you get that from my post?

If not from emotion, where did you come up with the notion that I start the threads that you accused me of starting?

 

[jdbrees922]

Maybe Painter does read these boards. Would explain why he goes out of his way to say Loyer played well when we saw he didn’t. He tells us he plays solid defense but yet pulls him on D every close game

 

[qazplm]

Bad fan? Where do you get that from my post?

If not from emotion, where did you come up with the notion that I start the threads that you accused me of starting?

lol Yes because a good fan is "petrified with fear that Purdue won't reach a FF and thus can't enjoy the season." This is the kind of silliness I'm talking about.

 

[BoilerAndy]

lol Yes because a good fan is "petrified with fear that Purdue won't reach a FF and thus can't enjoy the season." This is the kind of silliness I'm talking about.

But it's the theme of almost every one of your posts. People point out Purdue's ranking and record against top teams, and all you can talk about is the past. I don't know if that makes you a bad fan or good fan. I never thought about it. You may ask yourself why you made that connection.

Good fan or bad fan, can you honestly say you are enjoying this season?

 

[qazplm]

But it's the theme of almost every one of your posts. People point out Purdue's ranking and record against top teams, and all you can talk about is the past. I don't know if that makes you a bad fan or good fan. I never thought about it. You may ask yourself why you made that connection.

Good fan or bad fan, can you honestly say you are enjoying this season?

Nah, I have tons of posts here. Almost none of them involve that. lol I can't even remember the last time I even saw a post about Purdue's record and ranking against top teams, much less it being "all I can talk about is the past." I am sure I one time said something you didn't like and that's sat in your brain as "all he ever talks about is this thing" because you react so over the top emotionally to the barest hint of criticism.

I've posted a wide gambit of positive things, neutral things, and criticisms. The "worst" thing I've said is that there are certain elements that need to improve if we want to go far, mostly needing Loyer to shoot better, and doing better overall in defending teams with athletic guards and five out big men. I haven't once said we won't go far, or can't go far, or Painter can't make it, or won't make it.

But feel free to post all of the times that match what you are saying. I mean, it's almost every one of my posts, so you should be able to find what, ten in just a few minutes right?

Here let me help you with the most recent post I made about History and Purdue:

"2010 had way more talent. Two guys who played in the NBA, a third who was NBA adjacent, and several just good college players.

Still, there should be no reason this team can tear through non conference competition including back to back years of beating three really good teams in three days and not progress far in the tournament."

You're right...totally horrible! lol

 

[BoilerAndy]

Nah, I have tons of posts here. Almost none of them involve that. lol I can't even remember the last time I even saw a post about Purdue's record and ranking against top teams, much less it being "all I can talk about is the past." I am sure I one time said something you didn't like and that's sat in your brain as "all he ever talks about is this thing" because you react so over the top emotionally to the barest hint of criticism.

I've posted a wide gambit of positive things, neutral things, and criticisms. The "worst" thing I've said is that there are certain elements that need to improve if we want to go far, mostly needing Loyer to shoot better, and doing better overall in defending teams with athletic guards and five out big men. I haven't once said we won't go far, or can't go far, or Painter can't make it, or won't make it.

But feel free to post all of the times that match what you are saying. I mean, it's almost every one of my posts, so you should be able to find what, ten in just a few minutes right?

Here let me help you with the most recent post I made about History and Purdue:

"2010 had way more talent. Two guys who played in the NBA, a third who was NBA adjacent, and several just good college players.

Still, there should be no reason this team can tear through non conference competition including back to back years of beating three really good teams in three days and not progress far in the tournament."

You're right...totally horrible! lol

Then it seems we are both talking about other people's posts. A simple case of mistaken identity. I apologize for my part.

 

[BoilerDeac]

I'm sure I'll forget a few on the coaches side but seems like I've pretty much got it covered for some fans.

Fans:
Points
Shooting Percentage
On Ball Defense
Athleticism


Coaches:
Points
Shooting percentage
On ball defense
Chemistry with other players
Understanding of offensive game plan
Execution of offensive game plan
Understanding of defensive principles
Execution of defensive principles
Trust to follow the game plan
Understanding of role on the team when in the game
Hustle and effort
Willingness to rebound with max effort
Willingness to sacrifice body defensively
Advanced metrics
Post feed ability
Perceived intangibles through significant interaction
Understanding of when to pass vs when to shoot
Willingness to pass up a good shot for a great shot
Willingness to take big shots
Game experience
System experience

What did I miss?

So are you saying a coach is never wrong?

Hunter Sallis is starring for Wake Forest, yet couldn't find the floor at Gonzaga.

I think it's okay to admit that even coaches are fallible. That doesn't mean us fans know more than the coaches, but it also doesn't mean that fans are always wrong...