For those clamoring for CMP to use a zone defense more, how about this....

[TwinDegrees2]

My only complaint with Painter is his lack of discipline for not valuing the clock and taking a three too quickly into the offensive possession.

Keady and Knight to name two, forced the opponents to work hard on defense....stretching the clock as long as they could in a possession creating a situation where in the 2nd half the other guys were tired, they were in foul trouble and made mistakes that both Knight's and Keady's teams capitalized on. To me, that's why those games were always fun to watch because you knew that both teams would leave it all on the floor.

How many times did both Edwards, Swanigan, Dakota, and others jack up three's less than ten seconds into a possession and how many times did those result in four point turnarounds as the other team would take it down and score?

I could give a red rat's patootie about zone defense, but I do love valuing the shot clock every possession and would encourage Painter to make sure his players know there is a consequence for doing dumb things.

 

[mathboy]

Tough situation. Bench the 4 guys taking quick 3s and you field just 4 guys on the court. I do know what you mean I was screaming at the TV too. When those shots fall, the world looks real good. When they don't...

 

[TwinDegrees2]

Tough situation. Bench the 4 guys taking quick 3s and you field just 4 guys on the court. I do know what you mean I was screaming at the TV too. When those shots fall, the world looks real good. When they don't...

Where I got frustrated the most is when the Boilers were up, or on a run coming back with "mo" switching sides, and someone would come down and just jack it up from the Chocolate Shop.

 

[Dryfly88]

What does this have to do with mixing up defensive looks? You are talking about being patient on offense, I don't get the thread title??

 

[TwinDegrees2]

What does this have to do with mixing up defensive looks? You are talking about being patient on offense, I don't get the thread title??

It means there is more to "fixing" PU's problems than just a zone. If you don't value a shot clock, defense becomes secondary IMO.

That's what took UCLA and a lot of other's out of the tourney this year.

 

[mryankee2397]

if you have an open shot with 25 seconds left on the clock and it is one of your 3 point shooters you have confidence in then why pass it up. too many times we have passed up good shots early and ended up with an empty possesion. i guess you should define jacking up a 3. if the player is taking an open shot in rhythm then i have no beef with that, it is what i told my players to do.

 

[SIBoiler2]

Bob and Gene never had to deal with a 30 second shot clock and patience was a lot easier to enforce when it was possible to take a lot more time to get a better shot. I'm not a fan of quickly jacking it up but if you're 10 seconds into the clock and the ball goes inside and back to an open 40% shooter from 3 range I have no problem.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

if you have an open shot with 25 seconds left on the clock and it is one of your 3 point shooters you have confidence in then why pass it up. too many times we have passed up good shots early and ended up with an empty possesion. i guess you should define jacking up a 3. if the player is taking an open shot in rhythm then i have no beef with that, it is what i told my players to do.

Well, as a Yankee fan, I'd guess that you would tell your players to do whatever they want. Just kidding....if you've coached as you say, there's a right time and a not right time to take a three. I personally think it's the worst shot in the game...my fifth grade grandson's team has players that do it way too much and some are pretty adept at it but like many times with college players they shoot 'em too often and at the wrong time. I threatened to strangle his coach a few times this year, because just like with Matt and other coaches (Crean) there's no penalty for bad play and that hurts the team.

That's my problem, and I still believe you work the clock to make the opponent work harder to tire them out. I know it's a part of the game now and there's a belief that it opens up the middle, but I've never liked it because so many times it costs teams momentum and games. And yes, I know they win games, but more time than not they don't.

Where did you coach if you don't mind?

 

[TwinDegrees2]

Bob and Gene never had to deal with a 30 second shot clock and patience was a lot easier to enforce when it was possible to take a lot more time to get a better shot. I'm not a fan of quickly jacking it up but if you're 10 seconds into the clock and the ball goes inside and back to an open 40% shooter from 3 range I have no problem.

They both dealt with a 35 second clock. I remember when the 45 second clock came to college they said Knight's career was over, and the year after IU won their last NC.

I just think it's the worst shot in the game % wise.

 

[BoilerStation]

I think the importance of getting a wide open look regardless of the amount left on the shot clock outweighs burning clock for the sake of burning it. Especially on a team like Purdue where they are capable of lots of turnovers in a game resulting in no shot at all. I get the point a little bit about making the defense work and getting a foul or two picked up. I'm not opposed to Purdue swinging the ball a few times before post entry, but holding off on open looks early in the shot clock doesn't guarantee you an open look later on when you are talking about a team who has maybe 2 single players capable of getting their open looks off a drive(VE and CE)

 

[tjreese]

My only complaint with Painter is his lack of discipline for not valuing the clock and taking a three too quickly into the offensive possession.

Keady and Knight to name two, forced the opponents to work hard on defense....stretching the clock as long as they could in a possession creating a situation where in the 2nd half the other guys were tired, they were in foul trouble and made mistakes that both Knight's and Keady's teams capitalized on. To me, that's why those games were always fun to watch because you knew that both teams would leave it all on the floor.

How many times did both Edwards, Swanigan, Dakota, and others jack up three's less than ten seconds into a possession and how many times did those result in four point turnarounds as the other team would take it down and score?

I could give a red rat's patootie about zone defense, but I do love valuing the shot clock every possession and would encourage Painter to make sure his players know there is a consequence for doing dumb things.

The clock is huge to work the D as you said..have the time to look inside adn possibly get a shot that allows you to set your defense better...the shorter clock makes it more difficult to use the clock in an efficient manner than before since there is about 20-24 seconds on teh clock when a team is about ready to start an offense. The most botched abortion in basketball was the addition of the clock and made worse after 45 seconds was too long...

 

[z_one]

I agree that there are way too many rushed 3s. Carsen in particular drove me nuts, even though I loved his athleticism, he would throw up shots all the time with no one under the basket. But he is a freshman. I don't get anyone rushing a 35 footer unless time is running out on the clock. Sometimes guys start thinking they are Steph Curry. As to the using the zone. I don't think that Painter needs to abandon his philosophy of man defense. He needs to add another drawer in his tool box and I think he can do fine. If he thinks he can impose his will by ALWAYS trying to play man against faster and better athletes he will continue to be disappointed.

 

[samcboiler]

My only complaint with Painter is his lack of discipline for not valuing the clock and taking a three too quickly into the offensive possession.

Keady and Knight to name two, forced the opponents to work hard on defense....stretching the clock as long as they could in a possession creating a situation where in the 2nd half the other guys were tired, they were in foul trouble and made mistakes that both Knight's and Keady's teams capitalized on. To me, that's why those games were always fun to watch because you knew that both teams would leave it all on the floor.

How many times did both Edwards, Swanigan, Dakota, and others jack up three's less than ten seconds into a possession and how many times did those result in four point turnarounds as the other team would take it down and score?

I could give a red rat's patootie about zone defense, but I do love valuing the shot clock every possession and would encourage Painter to make sure his players know there is a consequence for doing dumb things.

Painter has changed a lot in this regard over the years. In the past, he'd yank / bench the Ronnie Johnson types that either jacked early unadvised 3s or drove to quickly 1 on 3 and put up stupid out of control layups that got blocked. IMHO benchings based on stupid shots have led to many transfers (RJ, Kendall, Bryson, and I'm sure a bunch of others...). We all watch these stupid / quick shots and go crazy when it leads to 4 point turn arounds, however I believe the game has changed and coaches have to live with this "run and gun" mentality if they want to A. get the 4+ star recruits B. keep them when they come. A great example of it working is the Houston Rockets. They were awful last year, barely making the playoffs. They bring in gunner coach D'Antoni and they are now arguably be the best team in the NBA....

And I agree with you a Zone defense is the dumbest thing on earth for us knuckleheads to be talking about. Not sure why so many "experts" out there keep bringing it up. If it was so great, every team, every where would only play it...

 

[BuilderBob6]

I agree that there are way too many rushed 3s. Carsen in particular drove me nuts, even though I loved his athleticism, he would throw up shots all the time with no one under the basket. But he is a freshman. I don't get anyone rushing a 35 footer unless time is running out on the clock. Sometimes guys start thinking they are Steph Curry. As to the using the zone. I don't think that Painter needs to abandon his philosophy of man defense. He needs to add another drawer in his tool box and I think he can do fine. If he thinks he can impose his will by ALWAYS trying to play man against faster and better athletes he will continue to be disappointed.

Didn't see any rushed 35 footers. Just sayin'.

 

[BoilerStation]

Painter has changed a lot in this regard over the years. In the past, he'd yank / bench the Ronnie Johnson types that either jacked early unadvised 3s or drove to quickly 1 on 3 and put up stupid out of control layups that got blocked. IMHO benchings based on stupid shots have led to many transfers (RJ, Kendall, Bryson, and I'm sure a bunch of others...). We all watch these stupid / quick shots and go crazy when it leads to 4 point turn arounds, however I believe the game has changed and coaches have to live with this "run and gun" mentality if they want to A. get the 4+ star recruits B. keep them when they come. A great example of it working is the Houston Rockets. They were awful last year, barely making the playoffs. They bring in gunner coach D'Antoni and they are now arguably be the best team in the NBA....

And I agree with you a Zone defense is the dumbest thing on earth for us knuckleheads to be talking about. Not sure why so many "experts" out there keep bringing it up. If it was so great, every team, every where would only play it...

There is certainly a method to the madness the Houston Rockets use as well founded in statistical data.

 

[Boiler Buck]

My only complaint with Painter is his lack of discipline for not valuing the clock and taking a three too quickly into the offensive possession.

Keady and Knight to name two, forced the opponents to work hard on defense....stretching the clock as long as they could in a possession creating a situation where in the 2nd half the other guys were tired, they were in foul trouble and made mistakes that both Knight's and Keady's teams capitalized on. To me, that's why those games were always fun to watch because you knew that both teams would leave it all on the floor.

How many times did both Edwards, Swanigan, Dakota, and others jack up three's less than ten seconds into a possession and how many times did those result in four point turnarounds as the other team would take it down and score?

I could give a red rat's patootie about zone defense, but I do love valuing the shot clock every possession and would encourage Painter to make sure his players know there is a consequence for doing dumb things.

While I agree with alot of things you post. I do not agree with this in today's rules.....and especially for Purdue. If you are forcing the team to work hard on D you consequently are working and expending just as much energy on offense.

Given Purdue's D and the energy they expend on that, they do not need to expend additional energy on offense. Thus, for Purdue scoring efficiency is what matters....no mater how long the possession. For Purdue and the energy they expend on D, you simply have to be a team that scores at an effective clip. Offensive rebounding helps, lack of turnovers help..... But given Purdue's D, putting points on the board is what makes a B10 champion. If we go back and look at the high scoring team in the B10 the past few years Purdue, iu, MSU, Whisky were all #1 or #2 in scoring.

I do not know how good Purdue will be offensively next year. I know on D they will give it their all. If they are a team that is efficient enough offensively to score 80+ a game in the B10 I know they will be champions again. Score in the mid to low 70s.... mid pack......regardless of how long offensive possessions are.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

Painter has changed a lot in this regard over the years. In the past, he'd yank / bench the Ronnie Johnson types that either jacked early unadvised 3s or drove to quickly 1 on 3 and put up stupid out of control layups that got blocked. IMHO benchings based on stupid shots have led to many transfers (RJ, Kendall, Bryson, and I'm sure a bunch of others...). We all watch these stupid / quick shots and go crazy when it leads to 4 point turn arounds, however I believe the game has changed and coaches have to live with this "run and gun" mentality if they want to A. get the 4+ star recruits B. keep them when they come. A great example of it working is the Houston Rockets. They were awful last year, barely making the playoffs. They bring in gunner coach D'Antoni and they are now arguably be the best team in the NBA....

And I agree with you a Zone defense is the dumbest thing on earth for us knuckleheads to be talking about. Not sure why so many "experts" out there keep bringing it up. If it was so great, every team, every where would only play it...

You are right about Painter and his yanking players. But.....the Rockets are all pros. The Boilers are not. Big difference. And as a guy who coached for a long time, you don't have to let kids play undisciplined. You just don't. Work them hard enough they know the difference between a good and bad shot or fielding position or three point stance and sit them when needed to explain it again and again....I blame the no defense AAU coaches for destroying the game, shot clock be damned.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

While I agree with alot of things you post. I do not agree with this in today's rules.....and especially for Purdue. If you are forcing the team to work hard on D you consequently are working and expending just as much energy on offense.

Given Purdue's D and the energy they expend on that, they do not need to expend additional energy on offense. Thus, for Purdue scoring efficiency is what matters....no mater how long the possession. For Purdue and the energy they expend on D, you simply have to be a team that scores at an effective clip. Offensive rebounding helps, lack of turnovers help..... But given Purdue's D, putting points on the board is what makes a B10 champion. If we go back and look at the high scoring team in the B10 the past few years Purdue, iu, MSU, Whisky were all #1 or #2 in scoring.

I do not know how good Purdue will be offensively next year. I know on D they will give it their all. If they are a team that is efficient enough offensively to score 80+ a game in the B10 I know they will be champions again. Score in the mid to low 70s.... mid pack......regardless of how long offensive possessions are.

While I was far from a great basketball player, and my playing time goes waaaay back, I was always taught that you "rest" on offense, which is more difficult today but as someone posted in this thread, running a swing sets up better shot in many cases and allows "rest" while forcing the defense to work harder. I know it goes both ways, but I still believe the team that values each possession, as well as the shot clock will usually win the game talent being equal or close.

I'm excited to see next year's team play. I honestly think they'll be better than this year, and should feature a more diverse motion offense.

 

[z_one]

Didn't see any rushed 35 footers. Just sayin'.

Well I won't accuse you of never watching a game like some on here like to throw around, but WOW BB!

 

[BuilderBob6]

Well I won't accuse you of never watching a game like some on here like to throw around, but WOW BB!

I'm sorry. Not good with double negatives. Please clarify.
Are you saying we were shooting 35 footers? That's what you said in your original post. You realize the 3 point line is 20'-9" right?

 

[z_one]

Lol, BuilderBob has no concept of distance? I'll bet some of those "buildings" look like something out of preschool. Who is the "we" you are talking about? A random 3 pointer taken by a freshman and sometimes a sophomore launched from way beyond the arc with no one under the basket happened more than it should. To pretend it didn't happen is dumb. Congrats.

 

[BuilderBob6]

Lol, BuilderBob has no concept of distance? I'll bet some of those "buildings" look like something out of preschool. Who is the "we" you are talking about? A random 3 pointer taken by a freshman and sometimes a sophomore launched from way beyond the arc with no one under the basket happened more than it should. To pretend it didn't happen is dumb. Congrats.

You're the idiot who doesn't even know the distance of the three point line. You actually thought those shots were 35 footers lol.
Nothing new here, it was already apparent you don't know much about the game. You just proved it beyond a shadow of a doubt.
I don't know what your previous name was or if you're just a troll. You started posting a few days ago, it won't last long. Enjoy yourself and keep providing the laughs while you're here. Buh bye.

 

[z_one]

Poor bob. Into personal attacks bobby? You need to put the crayons down and the legos you're building with and take your meds. You get waaaayyy too excited and personal about a stupid message board. You might also want to see if you can find some replays of Purdue games so that you can talk intelligently about them.

 

[mathboy]

Let's see... Builder Bob has 2,100 posts and has been on this board ten years. z_one has 27 posts, and likes to insult other posters. Who should we think is more credible? zone wants to argue about how far 35 feet is. Yeh, that's worth while.

Maybe zone is a reincarnation of Boiler33? Has the same MO.

 

[z_one]

Listen mathboy, I haven't gone after you at all. I have read this board for years. You want to have it out? Keep it up. I made a rhetorical comment that BB turned into a rant. Your 5678 posts to this point have shown you have little to do and their content has shown that you have even less to add.

 

[mathboy]

Listen mathboy, I haven't gone after you at all. I have read this board for years. You want to have it out? Keep it up. I made a rhetorical comment that BB turned into a rant. Your 5678 posts to this point have shown you have little to do and their content has shown that you have even less to add.

I think you are too thin skinned. Builder didn't go on a rant here, and neither should you. The 3-pt line is about 21 feet from the basket. He said he had seen very few 35 foot shots, to which you took exception. Sorry, but he's right and your wrong - in this case. Yet you decide to call him out and insult him, which I thought was unnecessary. I have no issues with you, and in fact, most of your previous posting were insightful and added to the discussion.

I think you misinterpreted the flow of this thread and incorrectly felt insulted. Except for my smart-assed comment, nobody else intended you harm. For my part, I will apologize for over-reacting to your over-reaction! How's that? Boiler up!

 

[z_one]

Sounds good to me! I was attacked on another thread so maybe I misinterpreted his end game. I will let it drop.

 

[spradecki]

My only complaint with Painter is his lack of discipline for not valuing the clock and taking a three too quickly into the offensive possession.

Keady and Knight to name two, forced the opponents to work hard on defense....stretching the clock as long as they could in a possession creating a situation where in the 2nd half the other guys were tired, they were in foul trouble and made mistakes that both Knight's and Keady's teams capitalized on. To me, that's why those games were always fun to watch because you knew that both teams would leave it all on the floor.

How many times did both Edwards, Swanigan, Dakota, and others jack up three's less than ten seconds into a possession and how many times did those result in four point turnarounds as the other team would take it down and score?

I could give a red rat's patootie about zone defense, but I do love valuing the shot clock every possession and would encourage Painter to make sure his players know there is a consequence for doing dumb things.

open looks are open looks no matter when in the shot clock. i am glad to see the shot early vs passing it around for 20 seconds after it took 7-8 to get across mid court and then a hurried shot. many times the hurried shots aren't even shots, just a guy throwing a prayer toward the back board.

a contested shot by biggie or hass is not as good as an open jumper by anyone else.

take the shot when it's there