Playing a zone wud not have stopped that team. Scouting report on that team my son told me they shout the 3 ball well so playing a zone wud not have helped either. Also they had 3 super athletic guards and a few off the bench that will give most teams fits no matter who they play even if they are athletic across the board at all positions. They moved the ball so well and had us chasing just wasn’t quick enough to get to them and that will happen to a team with athleticism. Yes the coach found the mismatch they wanted maybe throw hunter in there for defense but we needed Cline offense a that time and sometimes as a coach u have to make decisions based on those reasons. Purdue should have won that game VT made big shots when it mattered despite some defensive breakdowns. That team wud give duke fits im telling u bcuz they have good guard play there just as athletic and wud make duke come out that trap press they play bcuz VT guards are strong with the ball and all can make plays shooting it and dribble drive penetration to kick outs for shooters or getting to the basket. We lost to a team that is really good not just athletic but can shoot the heck out of the ball and we almost beat them take notice to that.
For as long as I’ve watched Purdue....
- Thread starter bonefish1
- Start date
does exposure to cheating mean elimination of cheating or just false assumptions? I don't know. Football is entirely different than basketball. On one hand it is harder to turn things around which I hope happens and on another single plays can carry more weight and players don't have to be effective in offense and defense.
Expand on this please as I assume this may have had something to do with Matt.
"coaches style of play, attitude/mentality, opportunity & willingness to play freshman early being key."
I'll try to come back, but have to leave for a few. Relative to this...I can agree with this...now take it a bit farther. What if a coach is 35% and another school or influence is 20% and the other school in comparison has a coach at 35% and that school or influence is 10% ...who wins?
I actually didn’t take them personally I’m just trying to figure what ur definition of what skilled mean if u can elaborate on that. U made good points I just thinks saying they are not as skilled is a little far fetched to say that 5 games into the season is all. So much more games to be played this season so much can happen that we haven’t seen yet from those guys. It’s all good truly I’m not upset or offended.
Syracuse who only play zone didn’t stop Uconn or Iowa it worked on mich state but not everybody. It may work if u have the size at all 5 positions like Syracuse does 6”7 or taller at all 5 positions to make it hard to get into the lane but if u got shooters it won’t work why they lost to Uconn. Purdue defense wasn’t bad even in 2nd half VT made shots the moved that ball around fast and even a team with athleticism those close outs when have only led to easy basket bcuz they would of been attacking the basket. Purdue will get that fixed and u will see there defense greatly improve
I didn't say that a zone would have stopped them (possibly slowed them on a possession or two) or that it was a reason Purdue lost, but jumping into a zone would have almost certainly thrown in a wrench and would have disrupted the current pace and tempo than VT dictated all second half. In a game that was back and forth down the stretch, who knows what the outcome would have looked like had one possession gone differently? All I'm saying.
IMO a players skill would be based on possessing the following skills:
IQ
3pt Shooting
Free Throw Shooting
Defense
Rebounding
Ball Handling
Decision Making (could be lumped in with IQ)
Finishing in the paint
Attitude (I think every player on our current team checks this box)
For the comparisons I made in my previous post, I feel the players we lost possessed more of the skills I just outlined compared to their current counterpart. Just my opinions, and could certainly change as we see this team play more.
Again, I'm not advocating for Purdue to forgo man to man completely and play zone. I'm saying it's totally practical that during the course of a 40 minute basketball game, a coach instills a different philosophy, even if it's only for a possession or two, to catch the other team off guard. Even teams with best man to man defense do this on occasion. It's like an option football team who runs 99% of the time, come out on first down and throw the football to catch the other team off guard.
You're right, Purdue's defense wasn't bad in the second half, it was awful. They scored 53 and yes they hit shots, but they hit extremely high percentage shots caused by defensive lapses. I could live with Purdue giving up 53 points if a team was simply hot and hitting everything contested, but that wasn't the case Sunday night. VT was hitting shots because of multiple defensive lapses that lead to easy and high percentage shots.
I get ur point that is possible but sir painter is a defensive man to man team defensive minded guy. Give these guys a chance they played well and gave VT fits most of the game despite some of the defensive miscues pursue had that game. 5 games into the season to take a team like that to the wire says a lot what this team can be moving forward. Hellava showing if u ask me only gonna get better from here
Depends who the other coach is.
Based on 14 years of recruiting data, we have 5 top 50 recruits (Etwaan, JJ, Hummel, Martin, and Biggie). 4 of those 5 came over a decade ago. So in the last 10 years we have 1 top 50 recruit. We have recruited a great quantity of top 50 players in that time. The deck was not stacked against us in every single one of those recruitments.
I love CMP as a game coach, and the way he develops players. We have to figure out a way to land higher rated players though. As I've said before, we should be living in the 50-100 range for recruiting while consistently getting at least 1 top 50 player. It's also fine to have 100-150 ranked players to round out classes, but we shouldn't have a team full of 120-200 ranked players if we want to consistently be a threat in March.
Ok what u saying is true to some point I’m saying 5 games into the season they took them to the wire despite all of what u saying and almost won with what 4 new starters a grad transfer and 2 redshirts who are now getting there feet wet playing together and almost beat VT who had more experience 2 nba prospects on there team and almost beat them tjatbis my point. Everything u saying is fixable too but give these dudes some credit for hanging with a team that most thought was gonna blow out Purdue I read it but only beat us by 5. If we got blown out by 30 we would have been dropped out of the top 25 but instead we dropped 1 spot and went up couple spots on other top 25 rankings bcuz how we played them. 5 games lets see how it improves in the coming weeks bcuz 5 game stretch it has to
That's kind of my point. We need more recruits with skills to make a big immediate impact (like Biggie). Lumping those types of players in with 4 year veterans is what will lead us to March success. It's kind of the Villanova and North Carolina approach.
I sure Hope to see Kentucky duke North Carolina Kansas there this march with all what u saying if it don’t happen and all those teams get bounces early what does that mean than just asking. Last 4 years these teams with the exception of Kansas last year North Carolina have been back to the final 4. I’m just talking last 3/4 years Ncaa Tournament success. Top 25/50 don’t always mean tournament success u can say it helps don’t mean always success. So many variables it takes to get there even without top 50 players.
I get it ut let’s see how it works out now bcuz we still only 5 games into the season and some are jumping the gun already is the point I’m trying to make. This team gonna surprise many the wait and see
In the last ten years each of the teams you mentioned has been to the Elite 8 AT LEAST the following number of times:
Kentucky: 5 (1 championship)
Duke: 4 (2 championships)
UNC: 5 (2 championships)
Kansas: 4
That's very good.
There's a reason why UCLA, Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, etc have the most national championships and F4 appearances and it's because they consistently get the best talent. Not exactly neuroscience.
You will see a lot of this after losses. There are a few posters who stay away until after a loss and then they show up to enlighten us at to how they would be a better coach than Painter. Be prepared as this young team is about to enter a guantlet and are likely to take some more losses before Christmas.
I didn’t say they weren’t good sir I said last 3/4 years years U wanna be right ok u right I’m not arguing u proved ur point so be it I’m moving on. I will not debate back and forth bcuz u obviously no more good day.
Sir the last 3/4 years they haven’t is my point never said they didn’t win championships just not recently. But no argument from me point taken good day
[
Yeah I see and they suppose to be fans. I’m just a person if you tired of what isn’t happening man put yourself out of your misery and root for Kentucky duke Kansas North Carolina if u want final 4s and think that is the only way you can get there with those scjools. I’m gonna stand strong for this team the good and the bad that comes with it bcuz my son is on the team and bcuz I feel they only scratching the surface how good they gonna be.
No not upset at all just don’t want no back and forth is all but it’s good debate going on and I’m ok with it. I can hang with the best of them LOL. It’s all good real talk
I will say this tho I think this team can do some big things this season. They went toe to toe with this team nojel don’t get into foul trouble it might of been a different outcome. All I’m saying 5 games into the season with a new cast of characters they played to win not to loose and didn’t give up and almost beat this athletic team that say something. Painter got something here let him figure the pieces out and work out the kinks this team cud surprise many and probably u if u give them a chance.
I hope so. We are shooting the ball better than I thought we would to this point in the season. We have a rough stretch coming up after the Robert Morris game.
Yeah some things gotta be fixed fast for sure but I believe the defense will be better. I think they coming into there own and getting more confortable with one another and each leading there new roles and others finally get on the court to figure out what they can do. To have 4 new starters a grad transfer and other freshmen playing meaningful min I think considering all of that to play VT the way they did just 5 games into the season that is hella good and almost won that game that say something about how they feel they can compete with any team out here. I’m excited for this team they gonna be scary good as season goes on just give them a chance and painter a chance to figure out what pieces work together and putting everybody in position to help each other. Once it all comes together they could be problems once big 10 play starts
Yes all the time... but you are familiar with the teams during the B1G season, so you can get away with that. The tourney, you are seeing teams outside your league & they are going to throw different things at you that will make you have to adjust.... or lose.
I'm not sure how you can say that. Look at the players he's put in the NBA. Landry, Hummel, Johnson, Moore, Hammons, Biggie, Edwards, etc... Not sure how anyone can argue that he's not a good recruiter when he's putting someone in the NBA almost every year. Yes, we lose out on players to MSU, UNC etc... but you can't argue we have NBA talent almost every year.
My feelings don’t change after a win or loss. Painter is a very good coach through an entire season, spotting talent, and developing talent. He is not great at recruiting or winning one game and GK was exactly the same. How do you suppose CMP learned to recruit? I’m not sure he has ever seen great recruiting up close. He is what he is and he’s not going to change.
Thank you for taking the time to type all of that and give your reasons. I don't know if "defense lives here" is a distractor or not. However, I agree 100% that better skilled athletes is the key to success...100%! When I was in school, nobody yelled IU sucks...they just didn't. It was similar to "please get me a drink" omitting "you" was understood. How Purdue gets more skilled athletes with very good coaching is the question. I'm of the belief of evolution rather than revolution, but others disagree. Anyway, thank you for taking the time to try to clarify your position.
I'm with you on evolution rather than revolution as far as CMP is concerned. I think we need to try going a different direction with some of our assistants. Brantley seems to be doing an okay job though, IMO.
Tempo really isn't caused by opposition anymore...the clock controls it. According to Brian's data the average length of possession for Purdue was 16 seconds and VT took 18 seconds. I mean it takes a certain amount of time to get in scoring position and a certain amount of time to be on the clock to shoot...and the variability in style of play doesn't allow much coaching or variety. What we have witnessed is more of a one dimensional game that reduces teamwork and amplifies teh indificual athlete. We now have a track meet, but use a ball. What happened to track?
I've said as much probably 20 times and nobody has ever broken down the clock to state something different.Relative to the zone change up. I'm VERY much in favor of changing up D in high school play or younger. However, I think you would agree that if you have the a really good team or better team you don't need to do that and can just fine tune something that will fine tune over time. If by chance you have the inferior team, can you beat a better team or a really good team by confusing THAT team by changing defense wiht the players they have? Here is another line of demarcation I see between high school and college. if your goal is to beat the best in a bigt game at the end of the season, do you fine tune yourself or hope to exploit the team your are playing by confusing them or imploying their weak area that has never been fixed? Not saying you are wrong, just not sure that is as reasonable in my eyes as yours in college. Course, like a press...LOTS of ways of beating bad teams...
I think in three to four years we will see a lot of skill improved over the youth of today
There are a lot of high school coaches that could walk into any college gym today and tell players how to beat a zone whether half court, 3/4, or full court press. The X and O are not what the issue would be. The issue like in high school is the personnel you happen to have and the personnel the other team happens to have. In the recent past...cincy and UALR their press was nothing new but was executed by quicker players which helped,but the real issue was the monkey of doubt THAT group of Purdue players had in crunch time based on previous encounters. Last years group were anything but fast, but the press was not an issue and neither was a zone. If anyone has the ability to scan the "thousands" (
) of posts I've made they will find me saying the press issues went away with Carsen when he arrived. It had nothing to do with Matt learning anymore...nothing to do with the players now being smart enough to understand things...it had to do with Carsen and his quickness.This whole zone, change up thing I don't think keeps Purdue from beating good teams, but I think talent does. Now within the confines of the most basic approach on O and D I think there can be reasonable debate on whether you should match up or attempt to make the other team match up...and THAT may align with small ball versus power ball. I personally think there were times I would have preferred big ball in some games, but I'm also fair enough to remember Purdue trying to do that against ND and Zach winning that matchup with Biggie. Anyhow, those are some thoughts I have and I can be 100% wrong...
Here is what I don't understand and I offer this to EVERYBODY as I did a week or so ago. WHAT constitutes ranking players? What is measured? how is it measured? I believe that the direction is understood even though the magnitude is not. How do I know that a 38 rated player is better for Purdue than a 75th rated player? How do we quantify the results of star power? When someone can tell me how a person is ranked...the criteria, the measurement and what is NOT ranked, then I can have an intelligent conversation with that. Until then I think it is important...just not the degree for my understanding. Please, anyone that has enough background to discuss the ranking and star power in s specific light please do becasue I really don't know what all goes in to that number and would understand the consequences of those rankings so much more...anyone?
Tempo really isn't caused by opposition anymore...the clock controls it. According to Brian's data the average length of possession for Purdue was 16 seconds and VT took 18 seconds. I mean it takes a certain amount of time to get in scoring position and a certain amount of time to be on the clock to shoot...and the variability in style of play doesn't allow much coaching or variety. What we have witnessed is more of a one dimensional game that reduces teamwork and amplifies teh indificual athlete. We now have a track meet, but use a ball. What happened to track?
Relative to the zone change up. I'm VERY much in favor of changing up D in high school play or younger. However, I think you would agree that if you have the a really good team or better team you don't need to do that and can just fine tune something that will fine tune over time. If by chance you have the inferior team, can you beat a better team or a really good team by confusing THAT team by changing defense wiht the players they have? Here is another line of demarcation I see between high school and college. if your goal is to beat the best in a bigt game at the end of the season, do you fine tune yourself or hope to exploit the team your are playing by confusing them or imploying their weak area that has never been fixed? Not saying you are wrong, just not sure that is as reasonable in my eyes as yours in college. Course, like a press...LOTS of ways of beating bad teams...
All valid points and well taken. However, to your point about fine tuning your philosophy in order to beat a better team, I'm not really advocating that. I'm not suggesting that before Purdue plays a team for example Duke, they need to dedicate themselves to playing zone in practice and then implementing it during the game in hopes that will slow their athletes. I merely suggesting that at some point during the game, especially when that team has momentum from running the same sets over and over with the same success to try something different. It may not and probably won't work long term, but if you jump to a zone after a made basket it throws off the other teams rhythm and forces them to adjust. If a team has been running high pick and roll to death for 5 or 6 straight possessions, and then the next time down you're in a 2-3 zone, that team is going to have to adjust its pace and re-set to work the offense against a new defense. Now that may only work for a possession or two, but you've now messed with their rhythm.
Against a team like Duke it probably doesn't make much of a difference, but in Sunday's game against VT where each possession down the stretch was crucial, who knows what would have happened had Purdue jumped into a zone for a possession or two earlier in the half? Can't really say anything good or bad because it never happened, but what we can say is that Purdue did not make any kind of necessary adjustments to either personnel or scheme and VT went off in the second half.
Recruiting services watch all of these guys play a lot of games and make predictions based on what they see and what they hear from coaches. It's not an exact science, but they are wrong more often than not.
To answer your question, you don't know that a 38 ranked player is better for Purdue than the 75th ranked player (neither do I). However, if Painter offers both a scholarship, then he thinks both can play at Purdue. Given that Painter thinks both can play at Purdue, I would rather have the guy the recruiting services predict to be better. I would love to have both the 75th ranked player and the 38th ranked player though (two top 100s in the same class).
Our current recruiting situation is that we are getting kids in the 140s and 150s. Assuming Zeke chooses elsewhere (and all signs point to that), we will have landed 1 top 100 recruit in the last 4 classes (Nojel).
A zone by nature requires more organization and that could in theory cause 2 to 3 clicks to go off unless it was recognized as the ball was being brought up the court. I believe that man is the most versatile, adaptable defense possible and although a zone can do that to a degree I lean to teh man for a lot of reasons I have typed in the past...and may down the road again if not wore out.
You can play man and change sooooooo many things as well even though the fan is just seeing man. Look at Carsen's dunk and you will see the VT player fake the help, but hug Cline because he was not going to help out. The other players would not do that and so it is very adaptable. now in fairness you can adapt the zone to players as well, but you still start out guarding an area instead of a player...and after typically two passes ALL zones look the same. Purdue adapted to zone offense in seconds and the other teams dropped it after a posession or so typically.I think had Purdue played smarter on offense, taken better shots, not missed easy baskets and got out of sync by not playing team ball...Purdue wins and nobody is talking about another good team making more baskets, because Purdue would have made the baskets. This was not Carsen's finest hour...it just wasn't. Hell of a player that regressed a bit to his freshman year. Purdue needs him big time and he will respond, but he took on too much attempts at scoring...AND other players were at fault in not picking up the O as well!
I'm not a zone advocate, but defensive 3 seconds in the NBA is to prevent NBA teams from playing zone...
I agree that Purdue would be better with better players..it is what "better" actually means that I hesitate to really understand...and is defense important in that ranking? Is attitude important in that ranking? Is personal physical maturity important in that? soooooo many questions that I can't speak intelligently to it and so far nobody can tell me enough to understand what "specifics" are being addressed. It think it matters...I just don't know how to quantify it to my liking. Again, I think Matt and Purdue have less talent than many BIG programs over the years, but being in the top three in the BIG as often as he does is not with smoke and mirrors either...
