Defense did not live here

[boiler_pride]

Well that was a disappointing night for sure. While I have to tip my hat off to Kansas, who played very well, I am still disappointed at our Boilers.

I think we were a bit lucky to escape ISU in the previous round. After ISU wiped our 19 point lead in about 10 minutes, I realized I don't recall another Purdue team that gave huge chunks of points this quickly. We had some bad teams but we could somewhat guard the perimeter -- or provide help defense when we couldn't.

That was the downfall of this team. Our guards just don't have that kind of foot speed or length. We don't have a Kramer, Barlow, Terone on the perimeter. We have Dakota guarding the opponents' best guards. No offense to him, and he does work hard, but he should not be our #1 perimeter defender. But with PJ and Cline in the lineup, we had no other options.

Despite our size in the middle, our bigs this year provided very little interior help defense. I understand Caleb tries to stay out of foul trouble but still... There were multiple times last night Mason got to the rim easily because Lucas completely sealed out Caleb out of position, seemingly not even trying that hard. Isaac is not that easy to seal out but sometimes he seems to watch just his man and lose focus on the ball. You gotta watch both.

I think the telling possession was when Jackson had a wide open 3, waited for about a second, but decided to pass to one of his teammates who was also wide open. We had 2 guys wide open in a game where there are 5 players.

Vince seems like he *should* be a better defender but he's not. I am hopeful he'll get better though.

I think offensively we executed much of our offense though Lucas really battled Caleb very well. Once a team can play him one-on-one, even if they give up points here and there, it becomes very difficult for us to generate points elsewhere. Caleb himself had a couple of careless turnovers in the first half when Kansas started out sloppy. Even when we were up by 8, I thought we didn't take advantage of their slow start as well as we could. Oh well, it's basketball.

As for Painter and the future of the program, I like Painter as a coach. I think he is a good coach. However, it's no secret that we've hit a plateau in terms of the upside. We can and do win the B1G in down years but we struggle in the tournament mightily when we run into the top tier teams. I'm not sure where we go from there.

Crean's IU won the B1G and went to Sweet 16 last year. He's out of a job this year. I'm not calling for Painter's job whatsoever, but he needs to figure out how he can position this program for a deep tournament run once in a while.

 

[StickPurdue]

Purdue struggled on defense at times, but you will notice that it was almost always Cline. Overall Purdue defended fairly well but Kansas wasn't missing. They shot over 50% from three at practically a home game. The refs even game up some home cooking and called ticky tack fouls on Purdue. Vince didn't help when his first three fouls were reach ins for no reason. Purdue fought and just finally ran out of gas. Kansas wasn't missing and the crowd took them out of the game. To win Purdue needed limit turnovers (which they didn't which lead to transition), beat them on the boards (which should have been easy because they aren't a good rebounding team, but they found a way to dominate. Biggie looked lost on the glass), and they needed to get a lot out of their roll players (which they didn't. Carsen looked more like Stephens. Kept shooting and kept missing. Sprinkle in some turnovers and he was awful. Cline got whipped on defense. Haas was ok and Vince was just ok when he needed to be huge. You could easily tell which team was loaded with McDonald's All Americans. Kansas was so athletic but they could also shoot which almost isn't even fair. They were the tournament favorite going in and they showed why.) You can blame the defense if you want, but Kansas has been doing that to teams all year. There is a reason most Purdue fans were upset with the draw having to play Kansas so early. Purdue came out hot, but ran out of steam. I am disappointed for sure, but hat can't solely be placed on defense.

 

[BBG]

As for Painter and the future of the program, I like Painter as a coach. I think he is a good coach. However, it's no secret that we've hit a plateau in terms of the upside.

110% disagree with this line here. Painter has entirely too much time left at being a coach to say he has hit the best he can already.

I base that on the type of recruits we see coming in and him evolving in just this season alone. Is he a bit behind the curve? Probably, but it really seems like he is making up ground quickly.

To me what set us back the most was the rule changes and the type of recruit we were going after as opposed to what the college game has turned in to the last couple years. Teams used to be able to get big centers and run a slow paced game, but that isn't the case any more. The college game has "sped up" and created a lot of parity throughout.

It wouldn't shock me to see Painter entertain some type of zone in the offseason because he'll have the athletes for it coming in as he needs to evolve with the game as well. I don't think that is some magic bullet mind you, but to protect Haas next season from fouls that demoralize him, an adjustment of some sort needs to be made.

Painter is a great coach with a ton of potential and has shown in this season alone that he can adjust and evolve as I said, but he has some learning yet to do himself. As the majority of coaches do and I think he'll get there.

 

[Casey and his Brother]

Painter has another 20 years here. Purdue isn't getting anyone better. Keady had three Sweet 16's and two Elite 8's and the court is named after him. Painter just needs two Elite 8's in the next 13 years to become a legend.

 

[Dryfly88]

110% disagree with this line here. Painter has entirely too much time left at being a coach to say he has hit the best he can already.

I base that on the type of recruits we see coming in and him evolving in just this season alone. Is he a bit behind the curve? Probably, but it really seems like he is making up ground quickly.

To me what set us back the most was the rule changes and the type of recruit we were going after as opposed to what the college game has turned in to the last couple years. Teams used to be able to get big centers and run a slow paced game, but that isn't the case any more. The college game has "sped up" and created a lot of parity throughout.

It wouldn't shock me to see Painter entertain some type of zone in the offseason because he'll have the athletes for it coming in as he needs to evolve with the game as well. I don't think that is some magic bullet mind you, but to protect Haas next season from fouls that demoralize him, an adjustment of some sort needs to be made.

Painter is a great coach with a ton of potential and has shown in this season alone that he can adjust and evolve as I said, but he has some learning yet to do himself. As the majority of coaches do and I think he'll get there.

Careful there BBG, you're stepping into dangerous territory!!

Once things calm down I'm going to post my results from the tourney on multiple defenses. Now is not the time, but I have found it interesting watching so many good teams in a short period of time. I have been keeping some notes on the number of teams that play multiple defenses within a game. I'm hopeful that with different skill sets coming and maybe an adaption by CMP will put us in a better position to adapt during a game.

 

[BBG]

Careful there BBG, you're stepping into dangerous territory!!

Once things calm down I'm going to post my results from the tourney on multiple defenses. Now is not the time, but I have found it interesting watching so many good teams in a short period of time. I have been keeping some notes on the number of teams that play multiple defenses within a game. I'm hopeful that with different skill sets coming and maybe an adaption by CMP will put us in a better position to adapt during a game.

Ha I know right?

See you made a key point that we need the players to adapt before we just throw something out there. And I just don't think the makeup of the team we had suited any type of zone but that I think is changing.

 

[PaBoiler78]

Painter has another 20 years here. Purdue isn't getting anyone better. Keady had three Sweet 16's and two Elite 8's and the court is named after him. Painter just needs two Elite 8's in the next 13 years to become a legend.

before we get too down on CMP, once again Arizona's Miller ( w/ all it's athletes) isn't exactly exuding the High Life. Then again, he went up against my favorite coach Mack.

 

[RegionWarrior101]

110% disagree with this line here. Painter has entirely too much time left at being a coach to say he has hit the best he can already.

I base that on the type of recruits we see coming in and him evolving in just this season alone. Is he a bit behind the curve? Probably, but it really seems like he is making up ground quickly.

To me what set us back the most was the rule changes and the type of recruit we were going after as opposed to what the college game has turned in to the last couple years. Teams used to be able to get big centers and run a slow paced game, but that isn't the case any more. The college game has "sped up" and created a lot of parity throughout.

It wouldn't shock me to see Painter entertain some type of zone in the offseason because he'll have the athletes for it coming in as he needs to evolve with the game as well. I don't think that is some magic bullet mind you, but to protect Haas next season from fouls that demoralize him, an adjustment of some sort needs to be made.

Painter is a great coach with a ton of potential and has shown in this season alone that he can adjust and evolve as I said, but he has some learning yet to do himself. As the majority of coaches do and I think he'll get there.

Great? No. I would put him behind Izzo, Matta, and even a bit behind Beilein just due to a Final 4. Above average, sure. He is on pace to be Gene Keady 2.0. I will be more on the Painter bandwagon if he can sustain some success and go to back to back Sweet 16s. If he was great he could have already adjusted to rule changes and recruiting would not have hit a sag there for a while. He cannot have an entire class of misses like this senior group of 0.

 

[SKYDOG]

110% disagree with this line here. Painter has entirely too much time left at being a coach to say he has hit the best he can already.

I base that on the type of recruits we see coming in and him evolving in just this season alone. Is he a bit behind the curve? Probably, but it really seems like he is making up ground quickly.

To me what set us back the most was the rule changes and the type of recruit we were going after as opposed to what the college game has turned in to the last couple years. Teams used to be able to get big centers and run a slow paced game, but that isn't the case any more. The college game has "sped up" and created a lot of parity throughout.

It wouldn't shock me to see Painter entertain some type of zone in the offseason because he'll have the athletes for it coming in as he needs to evolve with the game as well. I don't think that is some magic bullet mind you, but to protect Haas next season from fouls that demoralize him, an adjustment of some sort needs to be made.

Painter is a great coach with a ton of potential and has shown in this season alone that he can adjust and evolve as I said, but he has some learning yet to do himself. As the majority of coaches do and I think he'll get there.

Really?

I just don't see what you see. He's been there a long time and by the time he figures it out the game will probably have changed again. He will once again be behind the eight ball.

 

[TC4THREE]

Our defense was poor. No doubt about it. I questioned our effort in the second half when things started to get out of control but the truth is that we probably needed 2 of their top 3 guards to be off to have a chance in that game. All 3 were outstanding. We could've/should've handled it better but we're talking about the difference between a 30 point defeat and maybe a 15 point defeat if we don't mail it in down the stretch.

 

[Casey and his Brother]

before we get too down on CMP, once again Arizona's Miller ( w/ all it's athletes) isn't exactly exuding the High Life. Then again, he went up against my favorite coach Mack.

Who's down on him? I like Coach Painter. I think he'll end with a better tournament resume than Keady. Is there anything that seems unreasonable or negative in what I said?

 

[RegionWarrior101]

Really?

I just don't see what you see. He's been there a long time and by the time he figures it out the game will probably have changed again. He will once again be behind the eight ball.

My fellow Regonian, it is an interesting point. Giant post players, all the rage a few years ago, are now used by very few and the "advantage" becomes a disadvantage in most cases. If you have an inferior opponent with no big players and you keep the lead, great. But when the game speeds up, look out.

 

[Dryfly88]

Ha I know right?

See you made a key point that we need the players to adapt before we just throw something out there. And I just don't think the makeup of the team we had suited any type of zone but that I think is changing.

I just have found it interesting to see how many teams play multiple defenses within a game. You and I are on here quite a bit so you know how hot some of the debates have been. I just wanted to take a factual approach and the best I could (I couldn't watch all the games) to keep notes on which teams mixed up their defenses. I have found it interesting. For no other reason then just the shear number of teams that do it. It isn't just the blue-bloods with all the athletes, it's smaller schools too. PU is in the minority for sure. I hope that changes as soon as next season.

Again, the wound is too fresh right now. I think this will be a good topic for later and I will post what notes I took.

 

[BBG]

My fellow Regonian, it is an interesting point. Giant post players, all the rage a few years ago, are now used by very few and the "advantage" becomes a disadvantage in most cases. If you have an inferior opponent with no big players and you keep the lead, great. But when the game speeds up, look out.

Exactly my point. I think these things just take longer at Purdue for whatever reason but, I think that is changing as well.

We will see as the next couple years pan out.

 

[BBG]

I just have found it interesting to see how many teams play multiple defenses within a game. You and I are on here quite a bit so you know how hot some of the debates have been. I just wanted to take a factual approach and the best I could (I couldn't watch all the games) to keep notes on which teams mixed up their defenses. I have found it interesting. For no other reason then just the shear number of teams that do it. It isn't just the blue-bloods with all the athletes, it's smaller schools too. PU is in the minority for sure. I hope that changes as soon as next season.

Again, the wound is too fresh right now. I think this will be a good topic for later and I will post what notes I took.

I look forward to seeing your results. I've never been opposed to zone per se, just with the players we had on the roster. Going forward I think that changes and opens up things a bit.

 

[nagemj02]

I just have found it interesting to see how many teams play multiple defenses within a game. You and I are on here quite a bit so you know how hot some of the debates have been. I just wanted to take a factual approach and the best I could (I couldn't watch all the games) to keep notes on which teams mixed up their defenses. I have found it interesting. For no other reason then just the shear number of teams that do it. It isn't just the blue-bloods with all the athletes, it's smaller schools too. PU is in the minority for sure. I hope that changes as soon as next season.

Again, the wound is too fresh right now. I think this will be a good topic for later and I will post what notes I took.

Thank you for doing research on this topic. Maybe it will open new eyes here.

 

[BoilerBiker]

I just have found it interesting to see how many teams play multiple defenses within a game. You and I are on here quite a bit so you know how hot some of the debates have been. I just wanted to take a factual approach and the best I could (I couldn't watch all the games) to keep notes on which teams mixed up their defenses. I have found it interesting. For no other reason then just the shear number of teams that do it. It isn't just the blue-bloods with all the athletes, it's smaller schools too. PU is in the minority for sure. I hope that changes as soon as next season.

Again, the wound is too fresh right now. I think this will be a good topic for later and I will post what notes I took.

it's interesting to read the change of thought on zone on the board.
years past, you could read definitive statements like 'you will never see zone at purdue, as long as painter is coach'.

then just a couple years ago, painter did practice and try zone at the beginning of the season.

now we read continued acceptance of zone... if we have a change in personnel, etc. (which is even a bit different personnel than when painter attempted it)

oregon - i missed much of their game vs michigan, but heard the post game comments/praise for their multiple D looks, and immediately thought of the ongoing tourney research here!
also interesting to see number of times and duration, as kansas tried it versus us for only a limited time and abandoned it (after a cline 3).