In the tourney it's all about matchups and the team that gets hot, not necessarily the best team. This year was no different.
Evansville's Powell practically begging for a Purdue offer
- Thread starter just.a.fan
- Start date
I agree that Matt's priorities now seem to be Dickinson and Carlson. But if we make the reasonable assumption that he doesn't land either, the choice may come down to Powell or an additional recruit for the 2021 class. IOW, he'll have to determine where we stand with guys like Christie, Lander, Furst, Holmgren, and Goode and weigh it against the "bird in the hand" with Powell. First world problems.
Looks like Powell is in the 220 range. Thats not terrible but at this point you gotta wait and aim higher. I like that he really wants a Purdue offer. I like the idea of a prefered walk on.
A kid with D1 offers isn't opting for a preferred walk-on.
Nope, he’s not. BUT - Maybe they do the PJ/Sasha deal with him and tell him after the 3rd commit, that if/when another spot opens, it’s his.
Don't forget that the class of 2022 can "probably" go straight to the NBA, thus lessening the availability of 5-stars. OH, and hmmm, how many five-stars have we had. Oh and wait, what is the key to our team - like Defense, which most frosh can't play well ... four years of a frosh 5-star 1. not realistically attainable at the same position and 2. not the same as an overachieving 3.5-star in his third year. PLUS, CMP has stated many times how important the older players are in his opinion and in his system.
Would Powell be considered a project or is he just not high major talent? We've already got a project big on the bench in Dow, not sure having 2 big projects is the best thing to do.
I think he is a little of both (at the moment). I watch him play a lot and I'm not sold on him yet. He is raw and has somethings to improve upon, but what recruit doesn't? His HS team is very heavily guard focused so he is not the go to guy despite his height. And from what I've seen in the AAU clips, it seems to be guard action as well. He is athletic and moves well, but could be a project and improve to a high major talent.
My thoughts are it could work, and that you shouldn't dismiss the success that teams would have that recruit one and done players, and 5 stars. it takes a certain player and a certain coach to be able to pull it off. and that coach is NOT Painter !
it's nothing against Painter. But he's very particular about the players he recruits. There are a lot of 4 star and 5 star and 3 star and even 2 star players that painter doesn't even think about recruiting. I believe Painter would recruit a one and done if the player met Painter's criteria of being a well rounded team oriented player. Painter recruited JJJ very hard and almost signed him fully knowing he would be a one and done player.
Historically, when Painter has elite, talented, players, he prefers to start more experienced players over more talented freshmen. But that's not always the case.
Biggie, Johnson, Vince, Carsen, Eastern, Hammons and many more previous Purdue players all went to the combine. if they had received assurances of being first round draft picks, I'm confident they all would have left Purdue 1-2 years earlier than they did. if some team had guaranteed Biggie they'd draft him, he would have been a one and done.
So I don't believe you should say it would never work. It does work. And Painter would do it for certain players. And I highly doubt he is turned off recruiting potential one and done players. I highly believe there were "other" factors involved $$$$$$$$ as to why painter didn't pursue certain players like Langford. Painter was targeting La Lum players for the past 5 years, but he wouldn't touch $$$$$$ Bowen with a ten foot pole even when he could have used a 3.
I don't believe Painter shies away from recruiting one and done players. I believe Painter shies away from ALL players regardless of star rating demanding under the table payments. I also don't believe some of the blue bloods like Duke are as clean as one would be led to believe.
Haarms was a project. If Dow is that kind of project, I say we should take all we can find.
I'm not sure Haarms was classified as a project. When I think of a project, I'm thinking of guys who haven't played that long and are just going to be a step behind. Guys like a Mat Ten Dam.
Several people here thought Haarms would be a project. They talked about him being unranked and lightly recruited. You don't get that with a 7-2 polished player. Dow was on Painter's recruiting A-list. If he makes an impact this year like Haarms did his 1st year, Purdue will be very tough to beat.
First - Where did I ever say It would NEVER WORK?
Second - Please specify when Painter has ever started more experienced players over elite, talented players. Assuming you mean the elite, talented players were better and deserved starting over the more experienced player. And Tre does not count as his stamina and his dramatic drop in performance after his injury clearly makes it clear that he should not have started before he did. And I hope you don't offer Grady up.
I think a specific problem with replacing a one-done with another one next year is how can you assume you can do that at the SPECIFIC POSITION? Replacing a 5 with a 2 does not accomplish the goal!
Painter started Grady over more talented players because Grady fit Painters system. Painter started PJ over Eastern when Eastern was more talented. Painter liked PJ's experience over Eastern's athleticism.
And to reply to that post about Haarms being a project, there might be people here saying that, but he was a 3 star recruit with plenty of experience who would have played significant minutes for many other teams. Purdue had the luxury of having Haas, so Haarms was eased into his role.
And to reply to that post about Haarms being a project, there might be people here saying that, but he was a 3 star recruit with plenty of experience who would have played significant minutes for many other teams. Purdue had the luxury of having Haas, so Haarms was eased into his role.
Give it up D-D-DAY. You've now stirred the fires of the Wole and nothing can be gained by traveling the road that he guards.
Ok fire away. if Langford had come to Purdue instead of IU, would Painter have started him over Cline or Eastern?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!!!
if Langford had come to Purdue, would he have even received 20+ minutes? or been allowed to score 10+ points? Doubtful!
And I believe Langford knew and realized that and scratched Purdue off his desired destination list.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO !!!!!
if Langford had come to Purdue, would he have even received 20+ minutes? or been allowed to score 10+ points? Doubtful!
And I believe Langford knew and realized that and scratched Purdue off his desired destination list.
hey, DDD, you place so many of your qualifiers in there, why not also throw so more in...… ?
grady was far more talented than Wheeler and tre ? Why sure he was ……. I don't think so. he played, because Painter liked the way he fit his system. and I have to believe painter would have probably played Grady over any other 5 star freshmen
Painter had Carsen coming off the bench his freshman year. Was he ready to start ???? That was never the question. My point was that Painter has historically played experienced players over younger, more talented , more athletic players. he doesn't like playing younger players who make mistakes.
grady was far more talented than Wheeler and tre ? Why sure he was ……. I don't think so. he played, because Painter liked the way he fit his system. and I have to believe painter would have probably played Grady over any other 5 star freshmen
Painter had Carsen coming off the bench his freshman year. Was he ready to start ???? That was never the question. My point was that Painter has historically played experienced players over younger, more talented , more athletic players. he doesn't like playing younger players who make mistakes.
Along the same lines, would Painter have started Little over Grady ? or Garland, Barrett, or Reddish over Cline ?
I would.... but I doubt Painter would.
I would.... but I doubt Painter would.
if Painter actually does sign Dickenson, who would he play more? haarms? or Dickinson? My money would be on Haarms regardless of the difference in talent level.
the same will be true for Morton and Newman. I highly doubt either will start as freshmen. On many other teams they would. But painter likes to ease in his freshmen. I'm not saying that's right or wrong. I'm saying that's painter's philosophy. and also a reason a lot of one and dones look elsewhere.
the question I raise, if these guys are good enough to start elsewhere, why not at Purdue? Are we that much better than other schools?
the same will be true for Morton and Newman. I highly doubt either will start as freshmen. On many other teams they would. But painter likes to ease in his freshmen. I'm not saying that's right or wrong. I'm saying that's painter's philosophy. and also a reason a lot of one and dones look elsewhere.
the question I raise, if these guys are good enough to start elsewhere, why not at Purdue? Are we that much better than other schools?
So Tre's stamina from being overweight and Grady's clearly great play .... those qualify as SO MANY QUALIFIERS .... At times you should just stop before you remove ALL DOUBT!
Never poke a bored house husband that is fond of bloviating
so DDD. I offered you 5 examples of painter playing an experienced player over a more talented one, and you decided not to respond to any of them.
PJ over Eastern? yes or no?
So Grady over Wheeler ? Yes or no ? Grady over tre after tre got in shape ? yes or no? Grady over Evan ? yes or no? Who's the better athlete? Evan or Grady? I'll admit Grady was more familiar with Painter's system.
Cline over Langford, yes or no ?
Eastern over Langford? yes or no? Would Langford have started at purdue this year? he's a lottery pick, but my guess is he wouldn't start for painter.
Cline over Garland, Barret or Reddish? yes or no?
Dickenson over haarms? yes or no?
Newman or Morton or eastern or hunter ? yes or no?
rather than dissing me , why not answer the question, and BE BOLD and give your opinion for once .
Who would painter start? the more experienced player? or the more athletic and talented, yet younger player? my bet is painter would give the more experienced player more playing time even if the younger player is a projected one and done.
and I've said that before particularly when we were recruiting JJJ. look in the archives. I predicted JJJ would not start for Purdue. I stated Haas and Ewards would start over JJJ and tha t was a factor in hi m going to MSU.
How about Tyger over Cline or Eastern? Tyger would have come off the bench his entire purdue career. .
rather than dissing people, at least I go out on a limb and speculate and make predictions. How about trying that for a change and allowing others to criticize your opinions? Have a fresh take and opinion rather than copying and pasting what people already know.
PJ over Eastern? yes or no?
So Grady over Wheeler ? Yes or no ? Grady over tre after tre got in shape ? yes or no? Grady over Evan ? yes or no? Who's the better athlete? Evan or Grady? I'll admit Grady was more familiar with Painter's system.
Cline over Langford, yes or no ?
Eastern over Langford? yes or no? Would Langford have started at purdue this year? he's a lottery pick, but my guess is he wouldn't start for painter.
Cline over Garland, Barret or Reddish? yes or no?
Dickenson over haarms? yes or no?
Newman or Morton or eastern or hunter ? yes or no?
rather than dissing me , why not answer the question, and BE BOLD and give your opinion for once .
Who would painter start? the more experienced player? or the more athletic and talented, yet younger player? my bet is painter would give the more experienced player more playing time even if the younger player is a projected one and done.
and I've said that before particularly when we were recruiting JJJ. look in the archives. I predicted JJJ would not start for Purdue. I stated Haas and Ewards would start over JJJ and tha t was a factor in hi m going to MSU.
How about Tyger over Cline or Eastern? Tyger would have come off the bench his entire purdue career. .
rather than dissing people, at least I go out on a limb and speculate and make predictions. How about trying that for a change and allowing others to criticize your opinions? Have a fresh take and opinion rather than copying and pasting what people already know.
Last edited:
He was an unranked 7-2 player with 4 scholarship offers. Purdue was by far his best offer. There were people on here who saw that as "Oh no, another big white stiff project." Based on this and your evaluation of how you remember the players and team panned out just 2 months ago, I see you are into rewriting history tonight.
Is it your position that the more athletic player should always start over the less athletic player?
Yes, if his talent far outweighs the talent of the incumbent. No player should ever feel like their starting position is a given. I honestly felt both PJ and Cline should have been a 6th man.
But the overwhelming coaching philosophy of painter is to play incumbents over incoming freshmen. and if you're a one and done, and looking for an opportunity to shine, that philosophy plays a factor in your decision to come to purdue. Realistically, how many one and dones are going to commit to a school where they will likely come off the bench and not play significant minutes?
I'll ask it again . if Romeo came to Purdue, what would his minutes be? Would he start for Purdue? I have to believe that was a huge factor in him and many other elite players looking elsewhere. They knew they weren't going to be the featured player, so they went elsewhere. They went to a school where they could shine.
agree with it or not, that's my opinion, and I haven't changed it in over 5 years.
where I may have wavered is in my opinion of a player's talent. There are certain players I believe are more talented than others , and less talented than others. and my opinion is based on talent, not athleticism. There are many players who have athleticism, but not talent. there is a difference.
Last edited:
Haarms might have been a “project”, but he was an athletic 7’-3” project with hands and energy. I’ll take as many of those as you got.
So effort, decision-making, and team play have no role in whether a player starts? It should only depend on talent?
Apparently there are people who learned nothing from what just happened with Purdue basketball this year. And we still have people preaching the same old lines about the reasons why Painter doesn't get one-and-dones, no matter how many times they are proven wrong.
Me too! And I can't wait to see what Painter saw in Dow.
and my opinion applies to football as well. I believe everyone here would agree that Moore should have started over every single WR on our team last year. and the same will be for KG and bell this year. if a player has talent, he should start!
No incumbent should be guaranteed a starting spot no matter how long they've been here. and part of that philosophy goes back to the Bruce Parkinson and Kyle Macy days. Parkinson was a 2-3 year starter and became injured and sat out a year. In his absence, Macy, Parker and Sichting took over the backcourt. When Parkinson came back, he expected to start. Macy saw the minutes crunch and felt he was not going to be the star and left. And the backcourt of Parkinson, Parker, and Sichting soon became a chemistry nightmare of too much talent. It would have been a lot better if Parkinson had not returned, and we started the two best players - Macy and Sichting, rather than the experienced players.
No incumbent should be guaranteed a starting spot no matter how long they've been here. and part of that philosophy goes back to the Bruce Parkinson and Kyle Macy days. Parkinson was a 2-3 year starter and became injured and sat out a year. In his absence, Macy, Parker and Sichting took over the backcourt. When Parkinson came back, he expected to start. Macy saw the minutes crunch and felt he was not going to be the star and left. And the backcourt of Parkinson, Parker, and Sichting soon became a chemistry nightmare of too much talent. It would have been a lot better if Parkinson had not returned, and we started the two best players - Macy and Sichting, rather than the experienced players.
in the end, we lost. How good would we have been if we had a talented one and done at C/SF/ PF such as Hayes, Langford, Reddish, Barrett, Little, Johnson, or king, and had players like Grady and Cline coming off the bench?
How far would we have gone last year if we had JJJ ?
if painter can coach this current team of less talented players to reach the success it did, don't yo u believe if he had more talented players, he could take them even farther? if painter had Duke or UK's players, I believe he could have won the championship.
I believe you have already answered my question, as has painter.
Who would you rather have? Powell? or a possible one and done Dickenson? I know which player Painter wants. I'm not saying painter doesn't try to recruit one and dones. What i' m saying is his philosophy of favoring incumbents is a BIG factor in some one and dones going elsewhere.
Who would you rather have? Powell? or a possible one and done Dickenson? I know which player Painter wants. I'm not saying painter doesn't try to recruit one and dones. What i' m saying is his philosophy of favoring incumbents is a BIG factor in some one and dones going elsewhere.
I think the issue of Painter starting more talented players vs more experienced players is being overplayed. This is not a golfing match. Basketball is a team game. 5 guys playing like a team will always Trump 5 more talented guys playing as individuals. Painter puts the best “team” on the floor, regardless of the individual talents of each player. It is who plays as a team, not who grows into the better player 3 years from then.
I just believe if Painter had a more talented team, he could produce even better results. And yes, I will admit there are many very selfish one and done players. that is where scouting comes in. I don't believe the three who went to Duke were selfish players. However, there are some who are all about themselves.
I also believe talented freshmen can be as productive and team oriented as seniors.
I also believe talented freshmen can be as productive and team oriented as seniors.
Painter has never had a OAD. There is zero data to support the premise that he wouldn’t start them over a seasoned veteran. Where on earth do you get this idea?
How well did coach K calipari Roy Williams and bill self do with there one n done at least the last couple years with more talent so u say. Don’t get wrapped up into thinking a player is more talented bcuz they have a higher number behind its name or go to a blue blood school all is not the same for everybody. If that is the case every single year Kentucky Duke Kansas North Carolina shud b n every single final 4 and one of them win it bcuz each of those teams has more kids with. 5 star and a number behind there names All Americans Jordan brand Nike hoop summit all competed in each of those events how far did each of those teams go the last couple years and who in the last couple years have gone further. Curry kawahi lillard Thompson all wade I can go on and on all worked to get were they are and none had no numbers behind there name or star by there names how did that work out for them. I say to say Virginia had just as more talent than duke or Kentucky had they won it all why bcuz they they know how to play with one another. One n done doesn’t mean u gonna succeed at the next level it’s not just about getting to the NBA I heard painter say that a lot but it’s about staying in the NBA look at the statistics of how many of these one n dones are lasting more than there 2 year rookie deal contract is in not sure but something to look at for sure. I looked at stats of the 60 picks from last years draft did u know that many of the 2nd round picks actually played more than probably a 3rd of the 1st round picks and had better impacts on the game. Some in the 1st round played mostly in the G-league and there guaranteed to get paid no matter what. My point is talent don’t trump the willingness and work ethic a so called less talented player who goes to Purdue Yale wright state etc most of these probably talented players went to a school were they were wanted and wanted to play instead of sitting on the bench with there 5 star status and high ranking behind there name hoping to get some minutes bcuz it’s 7/8 other guys with the same ranking and star behind there name praying he can get on the floor ala marquees bolden from Duke couple kids from Kentucky sitting on the bench barely cracking the rotation but Ja Morant no ranking no 5 star when to a school he can play now look top 5 pick in the draft however it pans out for him he chose a school to play not sit. It’s not always about getting one and dones and thinking u can win with them all the time it’s about getting guys that is just as talented but finding a place they have the best possible chance to play rather than sit on a 5 star bench.
Many have said Biggie would have been a one and done if he had better guarantees from the NBA combine that he would be drafted.
Is it not safe to look at where one and dones go and to do a little research and speculation about why they go there and not Purdue? Admittedly you don't have any data on Purdue. But you have plenty of data on other schools. Have one and dones always produced a championship? No. But if you read the posts here, the vast majority of you didn't want to be in the same bracket with Duke. Why was that? Because of Duke's vast experienced players?
