Gillis can't dribble. He's essentially a spot up 3 point shooter who is scrappy and likes to get physical hitting the boards. Unfortunately, he (and I really like Gillis) and Morton need to see less PT for this team to develop for March.
Don't we need another Guard?
- Thread starter BoilerUpThenHammerDown
- Start date
Yeah, he’s a nice rotation piece on most really good teams.
My bigger concern is that he looked tight as a drum in the FDU game…
"Vegas knows that Purdue returns a great team and that Painter has them positioned very well."
And the NCAA Tournament committee knows that Purdue routinely loses to small-ball, mid/low major teams because CMP plays the outdated "feed the post" style of offense that athletic guards DONT LIKE and gets out-hustled by the other teams fast guards. That is why we will ALWAYS get matched up vs small-ball teams going forward. FDU's of the world.....
- "4 appearances - good for a six way tie for 22nd most all time (includes Wisconsin)"
- That is just so sick and disgusting, a school from a hocky state.
The committee didn’t even know if FDU would advance out of the play in round. This wasn’t a setup because the committee wanted Purdue to lose. It’s a case of Purdue shooting very poorly and committing a lot of preventable turnovers.
Vegas certainly understands that Purdue will need to clear its first round jitters, but Vegas also sees Purdue a one of the teams with the greatest likelihood of winning the whole thing.
+1400, which is just behind Duke and Kansas at +1200.
https://sports.betmgm.com/en/blog/ncaab/college-basketball-championship-odds-2023-ncaa-bm06/
I think Purdue's best chance at reaching a Final Four would be finding a PG who could move Smith to a bench role next year.I wasn't asking you, I know your answer
Doesn't matter anyway, we're not getting another PG, much less starter quality. Was trying to figure out if the OP doesn't view Smith as 'starter quality.'
Agreed! I have no problem with Smith starting IF he's earning it. It's scary to think we don't have a viable second option if he continues to show the same weaknesses he did this year.
He wore down as the season went on. Would be nice to see him play back up minutes until he's an upperclassman and gets a little stronger.
Last year he was a true freshman and pretty much had to carry the point guard load by himself. This year he’ll be an experienced sophomore with Jones to back him up. I expect that he’ll hold up much better.
Smith is a starter....top 3 pg in the big ten....but he can't play 35 mins being constantly harassed all game....Jones needs to provide valuable back up minutes....
Hopefully Jones is good enough to play 20 mph at the 1/2 and give all rest. That would pay dividends later in the year.
Be cool if Jones was so good he starts....but would have to be phenomenal to jump Smith who like you said is one of the B10s best.
That is either a blatant trolling attempt or the worst informed position that I've read in a while. Incredibly misinformed.
So, you wouldn't be in favor of bringing in a better player? Why not?
Name me a better pg in the portal than smith....we brought in jones who is pretty good....I just want to know where this mythical better pg is?....
I’ll go so far as to say that I have never felt better about the point guard position at Purdue under Painter than I do this season. LewJack/Barlow heading into the 11/12 is closest, but I think that Smith is a much better shooter than LewJack, giving him a better upside, and I trust Jones more off the court than I did Barlow after the way that the 2011 season ended.
Take your pick:
I don't see Jones listed on there.
But you didn't answer the question: If the No 1, 2 or 3 rated PG in the portal said they wanted to come to Purdue, you wouldn't take them?
Painter isn't going to bring in a transfer guard to recruit over Smith. He is perfectly willing to find a HS recruit, like Jalen Haralsen, to "receuit over" Smith.
This may not be the best example as Haralsen is almost certainly not coming to Purdue, but it's not because Painter told Jalen he won't start over Smith.
I think our best chance to have a successful season is to bring in a clone of Michael Jordan circa 1991. Only slightly less likely to happen. Just a dumb take likely aimed at ruffling feathers with no basis in reality.
There are many things that could happen to maximize this team's chances at making a March run, that's not one of them.
I get what your saying here. We aren't going to get a better point guard this year. It would take an extremely talented and confident player to see Smith on the roster and still decide to come to Purdue. Tough sell from day 1 and certainly not going to happen this late in the cycle.
On the other hand I get what bonefish is saying, We sometimes have "Purdue" guys that are considered adequate or even good by Purdue fans but maybe aren't of the quality to take Purdue to a Final Four. I can see this a little bit with Loyer. No doubt he's a good player and is as good as a lot of guys who have come through Purdue, but Purdue hasn't been to a final four since 1980. With Edey on the roster we may be able to get by and make a final four with a guy like Loyer starting at the 2. But without Edey in 24/25, I'm not sure he's "the guy" we need starting at the 2 to make a run.
People also like to assume every guy will continue to improve year over year, despite so many examples, who we can all name, of guys stagnating or even getting worse. I like our guys. I expect them to improve like everyone else. But you don't stop recruiting just because you have a good-hopefully-becoming-really-good-to-great guy on the team. Bring in all the really good guys you can and let it sort itself out.
Found him. Listed as the #216 best shooting guard. Scroll to the bottom of the list, then click Load More four more friggin times and you'll see him.
On3 College Basketball Transfer Portal (SG only)
I'm sure he's a respectable backup, but he simply isn't the caliber of player that some are making him out to be. And what happens if he gets injured or ill? We don't have anyone else on the roster to fill that role.
We are perilously thin at the guard position. At this point we need someone--anyone--who can give us additional guard depth off the bench.
That's just stupid on Painter's part. As a coach, he should always be looking to upgrade his talent. If the previous year's starter doesn't like having to constantly compete and win his starting position, then maybe he's not a competitor.
I'm not clear on your take?
If there were a top transfer who expressed an interest in Purdue, and who was more talented than a current starter, are you saying Painter shouldn't go after him?
100% correct.
There's a current player, who's been in the program for 3 years, who was pretty highly regarded (by Painter) despite some question marks after his AAU performances, who has started a lot of games and got a lot of playing time, but has arguably regressed from a production standpoint.
By all accounts this player is a "Purdue guy" (whatever that means), a good teammate, a leader, etc, but, the bottom line is, he's just not talented enough for this level.
The point being, unless you've got a Glenn Robinson or Jaden Ivey, you recruit over everyone and should always be trying to upgrade your talent.
Don't we always hear that Painter doesn't promise players anything? That they have to earn it?
Good find.
I'm interested to hear where Thadoc1 gets the information that Jones is "pretty good" and that we're fine at PG.
I like Smith and he definitely exceeded expectations last year, but he's not one of the top PGs in the country and I'm not sure where he'd be ranked nationally were he to enter the portal.
Smith is better than Kerr krisa ranked 5th...so I'd say top 5 if he went into the portal.....I've got sources on jones and from what I've heard he's our best perimeter defender, one of our better shooters, quickest player....quite the steal....you love to look at rankings but you aren't capable of understanding bball on your own....wouldn't surprise me if jones started.....
I hope you're right.
Are you thinking he could start at the 1 or 2?
it goes both ways. This is only based on opinion. You can say this though. He was the starting pg(as a true freshamn) on the number 1 ranked team in the nation, led the team an assist, won the B1G, played with the best college player in the nation and was more efficient then Kriisa as a Jr/Sr(who is top 5 on that list).
I can't really disagree. Did Purdue offer Lj Cryer? I don't recall, but if Painter didn't, then that pretty much answers the question about recruiting over Smith. I love Smith, but would have taken Cryer in a heartbeat.
He was referring to jones. And I was laughing because that guy definitely doesn’t have any “sources”. Unless he’s referring to Brian nuebert, which isn’t some personal inside guy like he’s making it out to be.
I'm not sure what's confusing you. The original post I responded to had nothing to do with going after an available player who is an upgrade to a current starter. It was a dumb hypothetical strawman saying that replacing Smith with a better PG was the best way for this team to reach its potential.
I'm all for bringing in anyone who can be more productive (I probably care less about 'talent' than you do) than a current starter. That's not going to happen because those players aren't out there at this point. If you want to talk specifically about PG, I suspect that your list of players who would make Purdue a better team than Smith does would be materially longer than my list.
The other site says that Jones could start at the 2 / 3. Smith seems to be a lock for starter, Jones could start alongside Smith and Loyer.
Similar threads
