I’m not sure I have seen anything new or not suspected as a potential problem for Purdue before the first game was played this year. That is not to suggest that there is not cause for concern, but merely to express that the Achilles remains with Purdue more than we wish.
Playing in front and bringing the weak side help on the posts are not new. Purdue has already beaten teams that did that…and lost to teams that did that as well. A good post player will see that in high school. That double will leave opposite areas open in high school and college…just that college players are more athletic making it harder to execute due to physical capabilities rather than some mental thing…unless not in to the game mentally. Having big men that are capable shooters and trying to make slower post players defend in space is not new. Like the help side D, teams have also used this against Purdue this year and Purdue has beaten them…and lost to them as well.
Pressing Purdue and I’m distinguishing between half court traps and presses which I consider to start on the other side of the 10 second line in generally full and ¾ court coverage have been used against Purdue. Sporadic presses in man have not really caused Purdue problems, whereas zone presses have, in the obvious nature when Purdue is turning the ball over and in the more obscure nature of eating clock and making it harder to get the ball inside to the posts in a timely fashion.
Terone Johnson could get inside the lane and THAT was his game. Only Vince and to a lesser degree Davis and Dakota can do that with a semblance of quickness…biggie is pretty slow. Remember he could still be in high school and so he physically has a way to go. Hill pretty much gets to the rim. So Purdue has post players and stationary shooters and limited in-between games in the half court. I think many of us thought Purdue would be better in this area…possibly a lot based upon Vince’s improved athleticism?
So, I don’t really think there are coaching gems that beat Purdue. I think the way to beat Purdue is obvious, but having the right kind of personnel playing well in a game that bodes well for the ref’s interpretation in that game makes Purdue vulnerable more often than we wish to believe. This is not to suggest that the refs cost Purdue the Illinois game as they didn’t…same with Butler and Iowa games. However, in every game…the ones Purdue won as well, some team will benefit more than the other team, particularly if the styles are much different based upon the ref’s interpretation of the game. Players have off nights and refs can too…even though that is part of the game win or lose…
Purdue is big…and slow. Purdue is skillful and non-athletic. Purdue is finesses, not power. Purdue on the whole is better than the parts due to choice (team play) and consequently inadequate when the “team play” is having difficulty due to player limitations making the team effective. Purdue has great depth, Purdue has less player chemistry due to the depth. Purdue is better than most teams if having a decent game and vulnerable to lesser teams that have the right match-up by teams playing well in the conditions deemed acceptable by the refs. Not having those three things Purdue probably wins…having those three things and Purdue probably loses…even to teams who may have inferior play to date.
Make no mistake the game has been changed by rules and emphasis of the rules to decrease the advantage of bigger teams by having a shot clock and now a shorter shot clock, a three point shot, an arc and an arc extended out another foot in the last couple of years to enhance the offense and not the defense. If the NCAA wants more parity and excitement in the games, the normal curve of the population will have many more 6’5” players than 7 footers…creating a condition that more effective players are spread out over more teams. If Purdue was playing with the same team 15-20 years ago this team would be great. Today, some of those advantages at times become a liability. My natural preference is to have two 6’9” athletic bigs as opposed to slower 7 footers due to being able to do more with them…particularly in today’s game. I stated that many times in the past. However, I thought Matt landing Haas may make Purdue a place for solid 5’s that needed some work to seriously look at Purdue wherever they may be since they may not fit in at other schools as well. I considered the “contrarian view” of worth and still do. Today however, it does limit what can be done on offense and defense as far as versatility while providing some serious non versatile strengths if executed and doesn’t eliminate the need for complimentary skill sets.
Much of the time in the Iowa game when pressure was applied…even if soft, by the time Purdue got the ball across the 10 second line “and in any position to start the execution” there was only about 19-20 seconds on the clock remaining. Purdue will not wait until the final second to shoot for fear that the shot now is better than in the final seconds and so there realistically is 10 to 12 seconds to get a good shot. If the team is looking inside first and that look is not there Purdue typically reverses the ball and brings the posts to the ball side and now if denied…the clock is really short. As discussed prior to the season…token pressure that eats clock can be a problem for Purdue and this was pretty well discussed prior to the season. In the Illinois game there was an additional 2-4 seconds most of the time over the Iowa pressure to work with. Same things though…deny for a while and the clock will play D for you. Illinois shot very well…shots they may miss the next game and obviously Illinois was able to score with some bigs away from the rim as well as some athletes getting to the rim. Illinois was backed into a corner and played with a sense of urgency. I suspect that many of us probably took for granted that the Illinois game would be easy…and it is quite possible that the much younger players than us thought the same?
Zone presses today are many times coached as a match-up coverage (zone alignment, but man double teaming inside that coverage0. Again, nothing new here, just better athletes that cover more space in less time. Like all match-up coverages the areas of the court will be defended by specific skill sets. Since most players are right handed the defense typically places the better trappers on that side and those that steal passes opposite in many cases…again the function of skill sets for court area. A left handed player like Ronnie Johnson not only has an advantage of being so quick, but left handed as well. It appeared to me in the past that Matt has recruited lefties if all else were equal and it does offer some advantages.
Hindsight may suggest that Basil’s athleticism may have been needed more than Cline’s shooting this year? Course Basil may be very valuable next year with AJ gone? I think it is fair to critique the coaches on specific things, but it may be over the edge to suggest they don’t know how to address certain things. It is fair to suggest they don’t know how to address these deficiencies with the current personnel. It may be that it is a weaknesses of who they have for that match up and refs for that game. It is fair to critique them on recruiting, but seriously that is not all on the coach either.
I don’t see Purdue all of a sudden finding that person that is effective on creating shots for himself…particularly without needing someone to get him the ball…advantage to schools with athletes that can score at the 1, 2 or 3 spots on their own. Vince is on the cusp of doing that. I do hope Purdue gets a few more players effective at 10 foot…players that can pull up if necessary and score…and more awareness to force the fouls when driving (although there were a couple of flaky charging calls in the Illinois game) Even little PJ recognized the need for that in the Illinois game…Vince too when not in foul trouble. Second I would like to see Purdue when facing a press play with a little quicker tempo prior to the trap (different things for odd fronts versus even front presses as far as alignments) and if reasonable odds, get to the rim. Third, I wish Purdue would more often play with an unbalanced court, with a clear out allowing the slower Purdue players that may be able to get a shoulder or foot past a defender to not have so much help D due to the Purdue’s lack of foot speed. Purdue has enough spot shooters to spread the floor to aid this. Fourth, I would like Purdue to feed the post more than they do by a player dribbling into the right angle. Right now Purdue feeds off of a player receiving a pass and then looking inside. The D shifts with that pass. I would like to see the bigs pin and hold that pin and a player dribble to that held position allowing the bigs to hold position rather than move to it and also allow the refs a longer look at the play inside instead of so many moving pieces….just to add to how to feed the post when teams are over playing the passing with quickness. Lastly, well quickly off the top of my head I wish Purdue had a good zone to use. I know that left a bad taste in Matt’s mouth last year. I know the man D is a superior D for most occasions, but there are times when a zone is needed. Purdue’s poor zone last year was more poor execution than just a bad thought. With all the potential problems of a zone it allows you to place your defenders on more specific areas of the court to help defend the offense with the skill sets on D for that area of the court. By nature it can cut down the distance needed to cover, require teams to become more organized and reduce the quickness differential between players on both teams. There are problems with a zone, but I’m not sure it couldn’t have worked with this team…and I’m a man person…
Tom
176 Months
Purdue
