Defense doesn't live here ... it's on break

[Born Boiler]

We have a few big guys who can score and rebound (including one of the best), several good shooters and a few good ball handlers, but, as solo defenders, they can’t shut down anyone.

In Big Ten play to date, Purdue ranks dead last in steals, 13th in turnover margin, 12th in blocks and 11th in field-goal percentage defense.

We can’t get key stops because we don’t have any stoppers.

Iowa -- no better than an average shooting team, according to the Big Ten team stats -- shot 50 percent for the first half at home against Purdue. Following halftime adjustments, Iowa shot 67 percent. Peter Jok scored 29, seven above his league average going in, with eight assists.

Minnesota’s Nate Mason scored 18 and 14 in two losses against Michigan State and 12 points in each of his games against Ohio State and Northwestern. He had 15 total assists in those four games. At Purdue, Mason scored 31 with 11 assists.

We’re either losing prime targets by failing to fight through screens (or by refusing to switch), or we’re losing others while drifting toward a penetrator or losing all sight during backcuts. Our usual defense appears to be standing by and hoping opponents miss uncontested jumpers and layups, like Wisconsin did.

Defense is supposed to be a matter of coaching and effort, because, as we’ve been told for years, “Purdue doesn’t have the best athletes, but it plays great defense.” That was half true, but not now.

Two words -- swarm, swat.

 

[nagemj02]

We have a few big guys who can score and rebound (including one of the best), several good shooters and a few good ball handlers, but, as solo defenders, they can’t shut down anyone.

In Big Ten play to date, Purdue ranks dead last in steals, 13th in turnover margin, 12th in blocks and 11th in field-goal percentage defense.

We can’t get key stops because we don’t have any stoppers.

Iowa -- no better than an average shooting team, according to the Big Ten team stats -- shot 50 percent for the first half at home against Purdue. Following halftime adjustments, Iowa shot 67 percent. Peter Jok scored 29, seven above his league average going in, with eight assists.

Minnesota’s Nate Mason scored 18 and 14 in two losses against Michigan State and 12 points in each of his games against Ohio State and Northwestern. He had 15 total assists in those four games. At Purdue, Mason scored 31 with 11 assists.

We’re either losing prime targets by failing to fight through screens (or by refusing to switch), or we’re losing others while drifting toward a penetrator or losing all sight during backcuts. Our usual defense appears to be standing by and hoping opponents miss uncontested jumpers and layups, like Wisconsin did.

Defense is supposed to be a matter of coaching and effort, because, as we’ve been told for years, “Purdue doesn’t have the best athletes, but it plays great defense.” That was half true, but not now.

Two words -- swarm, swat.

Since their usual defense isn't that effective with this personnel, shouldn't they try some other defensive approaches besides man-to-man?

 

[big10best]

I agree. For a team that touts itself as defense oriented, its a shame we we had zero defensive answer for Jok and he hangs 29 on us. We wont try anything new either.

 

[Feace]

I agree. For a team that touts itself as defense oriented, its a shame we we had zero defensive answer for Jok and he hangs 29 on us. We wont try anything new either.

Totally agree with you and everyone else on this thread. We are playing D like a Queen coached team!

 

[klmLB]

I don't disagree, but will say that a lot of our players on this year's squad either weren't naturally good defenders when they arrived or have limited potential for becoming a great defender at the D1 or B1G level (in terms of lateral ability or agility). However, many have become better defenders while at Purdue though, but still not elite defenders.

In general, I'd say that the overall talent of this year's team is better than most teams in years past. However, many players came to Purdue as offensively skilled players with the hopes of improving and raising their defensive abilities and agility at Purdue. This has led to, for the most part, beautiful team offense - that's difficult for opposing coaches to game plan against - unlike many Purdue teams of the past. That's the trade off.

In the Keady teams of yesteryear, specifically thinking of his teams that 3-peat as B1G champs, outside of G-Rob, Zo, and Waddell, those players were the opposite - they came to Purdue with athletic prowess but limited offensive game (think Porter Roberts, Herb Dove, Justin Jennings). Thinking of that 1996 team, which shocked everyone by winning the B1G, defensively, we were swarming, active and disruptive. Offensively, we scored just enough to win ugly. We also played harder than most teams, which in the regular season makes a difference, but come NCAA time, everyone is playing all out.

The disadvantage of those Keady teams were that they were easy to game plan against. If you could somehow slow down Glenn, Zo, then you had a really good chance to win since the others couldn't be relied upon as much to score (but they did score some, I don't want to discount them, but Keady - like last year's team - was so deliberate in terms of how they ran their offense. So, when an opposing team gives too much attention to 1 or 2 players, the others aren't able to convert or take advantage. This year's team can make you pay for focusing defensive attention to one area (post play vs 3 pt shooting).

To be honest, I think I like the current model and think it sells better to today's recruits and will ultimately lead to more success in terms of wins and losses (especially considering the 30 sec shot clock vs 35). So, it's a give and take.

I think though, in a perfect world, it would be nice if we had an athletic 6'6" type that could at least score enough on offensive end but could defend the Jok type players. Then, our ceiling would be even higher.

 

[cprh9u]

Still time but a 3-2 start including losses to Iowa and Minny, it's looking like we miss RD and AJH from a leadership and defensive standpoint A LOT, something many on this board overlooked or left.

 

[TC4THREE]

Remember though. We were told that we wouldn't miss Davis at all because he was such a liability on offense.

 

[Inspector100]

I don't disagree, but will say that a lot of our players on this year's squad either weren't naturally good defenders when they arrived or have limited potential for becoming a great defender at the D1 or B1G level (in terms of lateral ability or agility). However, many have become better defenders while at Purdue though, but still not elite defenders.

In general, I'd say that the overall talent of this year's team is better than most teams in years past. However, many players came to Purdue as offensively skilled players with the hopes of improving and raising their defensive abilities and agility at Purdue. This has led to, for the most part, beautiful team offense - that's difficult for opposing coaches to game plan against - unlike many Purdue teams of the past. That's the trade off.

In the Keady teams of yesteryear, specifically thinking of his teams that 3-peat as B1G champs, outside of G-Rob, Zo, and Waddell, those players were the opposite - they came to Purdue with athletic prowess but limited offensive game (think Porter Roberts, Herb Dove, Justin Jennings). Thinking of that 1996 team, which shocked everyone by winning the B1G, defensively, we were swarming, active and disruptive. Offensively, we scored just enough to win ugly. We also played harder than most teams, which in the regular season makes a difference, but come NCAA time, everyone is playing all out.

The disadvantage of those Keady teams were that they were easy to game plan against. If you could somehow slow down Glenn, Zo, then you had a really good chance to win since the others couldn't be relied upon as much to score (but they did score some, I don't want to discount them, but Keady - like last year's team - was so deliberate in terms of how they ran their offense. So, when an opposing team gives too much attention to 1 or 2 players, the others aren't able to convert or take advantage. This year's team can make you pay for focusing defensive attention to one area (post play vs 3 pt shooting).

To be honest, I think I like the current model and think it sells better to today's recruits and will ultimately lead to more success in terms of wins and losses (especially considering the 30 sec shot clock vs 35). So, it's a give and take.

I think though, in a perfect world, it would be nice if we had an athletic 6'6" type that could at least score enough on offensive end but could defend the Jok type players. Then, our ceiling would be even higher.

You covered so many things here that I feel like a mosquito in a nudist colony. I know what to do, just don't know where to start. But here goes. I have looked at a couple games from the '87-'88 season and the game against Kansas in Big Dog's last year. Here are my comparisons.

1) Purdue's current team doesn't have the same defensive fundamentals as the 87 team or the 94 team. Those teams were very well prepared as seen by the way they shaded the offensive players based on the position on the floor and who the player was. I don't see anything like this with this current team. I don't know if it's a weakness in the scouting report, the idea that practices are shorter now, or something else, but I am not impressed with the current product.

2) Kip Jones was a young player with the 3 Amigos team and learned quickly how to position for ball denial and rebounding. How did he learn so early. Tony Jones was also on this team and was super at these things including lateral quckness. And Doug Lee was able to be very effective at the 3 as an undersized, slower player, almost like Dakich on Jordan. But he also fouled a lot.

3) Bill Raftery was ecstatic over the positioning and intensity of the Boiler defense in the last 3 minutes of the game with Kansas as the JayHawks were pushing to tie the game and take the lead. I trust his judgement on this. I haven't seen this with our current team. Cuonzo Martin played in that game and he still has that quality in his later years as a coach.

4) Gene had Stallings, Weber and Tom Reiter as assistants. These people were students of the game. I don't know if anyone on our current staff is a basketball junkie to this level, but I do know that anytime CMP looses an assistant, things don't change very much. I don't see much fire in our assistants except maybe a little from Coach Gary.

5) Gene wasn't afraid to use a 2-3 zone in the 87 year. It was used to pace the game and slow down the distance each player had to cover as compared to the man-to-man. That team wasn't very deep at guard and needed to keep Everette Stephens on the floor as much as possible. There was real quickness on this team and Gene also used a full court trap sometimes during a game as a surprise tactic. This team had several good rebounders in Mel McCants, Mitchell, Kip Jones and Arnold helping the effectiveness of the zone.

6) It is obvious that Gene had a game plan for each opponent and demanded that it be followed. I like that and don't accept the "liberal" approach to this sort of thing. By this I am referring to players doing a lot of freelancing that deviates greatly from that plan. I see that a lot with the current team. Maybe it is the "motion offense" that fosters this, but I don't think this approach elevates the efficiency of the players on either offense or defense.

Sorry to be so windy here, but I had to share what I recently watched.

 

[Born Boiler]

Just three days after we allowed Iowa to shoot over 56 percent -- 67 percent in the second half -- the Mildcats showed how to shave 21 percent and 29 points off of what we gave up and win by 35.

Does Evanston now harbor the state-of-the-art model for athletes and defense? Was Iowa fully overwhelmed by a road crowd of less than 8,000? Or did our kids just really stink it up against a team they knew they were supposed to beat again?

More of that kind of defensive effort and we’ll finish below .500 in a Big Ten that we should win.

 

[lbodel]

Reading these posts confuse me. I thought we needed to focus on offense more and less on defense? That's what I've read for months....errrr years.

 

[TopSecretBoiler]

Intelligent athletes make the best defenders. Those aren't a dime a dozen. I'll take the improved offense. We didn't lose because our defense was bad, we lost because we missed every shot down the stretch. I lost count of how many opportunities we had to beat iowa.

 

[lbodel]

Intelligent athletes make the best defenders. Those aren't a dime a dozen. I'll take the improved offense. We didn't lose because our defense was bad, we lost because we missed every shot down the stretch. I lost count of how many opportunities we had to beat iowa.

We also were out rebounded, which does not happen much.

 

[PaBoiler78]

We also were out rebounded, which does not happen much.

got outscored 40 - 20 in the paint vs Iowa?