Gold & Black Live: Painter interview

[nagemj02]

I agreed with most of what Painter had to say and he and the players keep saying that this team is working on something "new" defensively (I'm hoping that means some zone formations so that Haas and Swanigan aren't out on the perimeter often in man D, pick-and-roll situations). However, I did take exception when he was talking about Carsen Edwards and how CE has to adjust to Purdue but that Painter doesn't have to adjust to CE's game. Some of the best college coaches ever, such as Mike Krzyzewski, have stated in recent years how each team they coach is unique in its parts and that HE adjusts his coaching style and strategies, based on his personnel. Apparently, Painter still doesn't believe in that. If you haven't seen it already, here is a link to the GBL interview page (Painter makes that type of statement about halfway through the interview): http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

After all this time, does he really still believe that he doesn't need to adjust to his personnel (at least with his guards) or am I taking this out of context?

 

[boilerzz]

Man, you just search for things to support a thin, easily disputed argument. Painter has adjusted to his personnel often throughout his tenure, both offensively and defensively.

 

[tjreese]

I agreed with most of what Painter had to say and he and the players keep saying that this team is working on something "new" defensively (I'm hoping that means some zone formations so that Haas and Swanigan aren't out on the perimeter often in man D, pick-and-roll situations). However, I did take exception when he was talking about Carsen Edwards and how CE has to adjust to Purdue but that Painter doesn't have to adjust to CE's game. Some of the best college coaches ever, such as Mike Krzyzewski, have stated in recent years how each team they coach is unique in its parts and that HE adjusts his coaching style and strategies, based on his personnel. Apparently, Painter still doesn't believe in that. If you haven't seen it already, here is a link to the GBL interview page (Painter makes that type of statement about halfway through the interview): http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

After all this time, does he really still believe that he doesn't need to adjust to his personnel (at least with his guards) or am I taking this out of context?

I will listen to this in a few, but EVERY coach "ADJUSTS" his or her coaching "STYLE" to his personnel and MATT is NO exception. That adjustment is always on an individual and team. Sometimes it is more obvious than other times.

If you play Biggie and Haas together, ONE is going to be out on the perimeter if not both...unless the opposing team has NO threat out there for them to defend. Tell me a pure zone that it wouldn't be the case. Tell me a matchup zone condition it wouldn't be the case. Spacing is not something for Purdue..other teams want it as well. It always comes down to your personnel and the opposing team's personnel in what you are best suited to do and what they are best suited to do with each team trying to play with their strengths and hide their weaknesses.

I understand the frustration of some Purdue fans in the tourney and Crossroads as well. I also understand the scrutiny on recruiting and the assumption that a direct result follows. That said, I cannot think of a post where people wanting rid of Matt actually post about basketball specifics as opposed to sitting on Mount Olympus and generalized statements. That is not to suggest that they couldn't be right...just that they never mention thinking to support their feelings. I enjoy your posts, AND would like to see "SOME" zone, but it is NOT the cure all for Purdue. There are very few things a zone will do that man cannot and that is why those making a living in basketball more often than not play man. Even if Purdue played a 3-2 or 1-2-2 trying to keep 2 close to the basket and the other three covering the perimeter, it still requires players in the back to cover a pass to the baseline. Sure the perimeter players can cover the baseline off a dribble, but a pass is a different story.

Other than Big dog, I can't think of a player that the Purdue team needed to mold around rather than players molding around the team strengths and weaknesses. Carson will be fine, but I'm sure everyone wants him to use his strengths, but not to the detriment of the team or what other players bring. I would have written more, but in the past I have wrote tomes of thoughts on zone and man.

I'm excited for this year and hope Purdue can add another two or three quality players for 2017. Matt is obviously not perfect, but not near as bad as some suggest.

 

[olafmetal]

I'm extremely optimistic about what CE will be able to bring to the team. But he is a freshman on a team with plenty of established and developing weapons. I don't doubt that Painter might craft the offense to fit his strengths if he develops into a monster talent, but we are still a long way off from that possibility.

 

[BoilerDaddy]

I agreed with most of what Painter had to say and he and the players keep saying that this team is working on something "new" defensively (I'm hoping that means some zone formations so that Haas and Swanigan aren't out on the perimeter often in man D, pick-and-roll situations). However, I did take exception when he was talking about Carsen Edwards and how CE has to adjust to Purdue but that Painter doesn't have to adjust to CE's game. Some of the best college coaches ever, such as Mike Krzyzewski, have stated in recent years how each team they coach is unique in its parts and that HE adjusts his coaching style and strategies, based on his personnel. Apparently, Painter still doesn't believe in that. If you haven't seen it already, here is a link to the GBL interview page (Painter makes that type of statement about halfway through the interview): http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

After all this time, does he really still believe that he doesn't need to adjust to his personnel (at least with his guards) or am I taking this out of context?

I think that you are taking the statement out of the context. Painter has always adjusted his schemes to match the strengths of his teams. I mentioned examples in a recent thread, but compare 2011-12 to 2014-15, as an example.

What he meant is that each player needs to put aside his personnel agenda for the good of the team. Biggie talked about learning this in a recent interview as well.

 

[BoiledSteel]

I agreed with most of what Painter had to say and he and the players keep saying that this team is working on something "new" defensively (I'm hoping that means some zone formations so that Haas and Swanigan aren't out on the perimeter often in man D, pick-and-roll situations). However, I did take exception when he was talking about Carsen Edwards and how CE has to adjust to Purdue but that Painter doesn't have to adjust to CE's game. Some of the best college coaches ever, such as Mike Krzyzewski, have stated in recent years how each team they coach is unique in its parts and that HE adjusts his coaching style and strategies, based on his personnel. Apparently, Painter still doesn't believe in that. If you haven't seen it already, here is a link to the GBL interview page (Painter makes that type of statement about halfway through the interview): http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

After all this time, does he really still believe that he doesn't need to adjust to his personnel (at least with his guards) or am I taking this out of context?

So is there anything you won't take out of context and complain about? Seriously it's getting ridiculous.

 

[BoiledSteel]

I'm excited for this year and hope Purdue can add another two or three quality players for 2017. Matt is obviously not perfect, but not near as bad as some suggest.

So very, very true.

 

[boilersallthewaynow]

I agreed with most of what Painter had to say and he and the players keep saying that this team is working on something "new" defensively (I'm hoping that means some zone formations so that Haas and Swanigan aren't out on the perimeter often in man D, pick-and-roll situations). However, I did take exception when he was talking about Carsen Edwards and how CE has to adjust to Purdue but that Painter doesn't have to adjust to CE's game. Some of the best college coaches ever, such as Mike Krzyzewski, have stated in recent years how each team they coach is unique in its parts and that HE adjusts his coaching style and strategies, based on his personnel. Apparently, Painter still doesn't believe in that. If you haven't seen it already, here is a link to the GBL interview page (Painter makes that type of statement about halfway through the interview): http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

After all this time, does he really still believe that he doesn't need to adjust to his personnel (at least with his guards) or am I taking this out of context?

Yep.

According to what a highly regarded Lafayette area bb recruit has allegedly said, Painter is just an uninspiring, even boring recruiter who doesn't sell a great vision to prospective players.

Add the ridiculous rigid philosophy on players conforming to a system that doesn't excite players to want to play in it instead of evaluating and adapting a system to match the players talents and making the team experience more enjoyable.

Boom you have what we've all witnessed for what? 11 years

These are very significant reasons why CMP struggles.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Yep.

According to what a highly regarded Lafayette area bb recruit has allegedly said, Painter is just an uninspiring, even boring recruiter who doesn't sell a great vision to prospective players.

Add the ridiculous rigid philosophy on players conforming to a system that doesn't excite players to want to play in it instead of evaluating and adapting a system to match the players talents and making the team experience more enjoyable.

Boom you have what we've all witnessed for what? 11 years

These are very significant reasons why CMP struggles.

you have a link for this? Who are you referring to? Only Lafayette area prospect I know of is Phinisee and he's not even top 100 at this point.

 

[BoiledSteel]

According to what a highly regarded Lafayette area bb recruit has allegedly said,

 

[mathboy]

I agreed with most of what Painter had to say and he and the players keep saying that this team is working on something "new" defensively (I'm hoping that means some zone formations so that Haas and Swanigan aren't out on the perimeter often in man D, pick-and-roll situations). However, I did take exception when he was talking about Carsen Edwards and how CE has to adjust to Purdue but that Painter doesn't have to adjust to CE's game. Some of the best college coaches ever, such as Mike Krzyzewski, have stated in recent years how each team they coach is unique in its parts and that HE adjusts his coaching style and strategies, based on his personnel. Apparently, Painter still doesn't believe in that. If you haven't seen it already, here is a link to the GBL interview page (Painter makes that type of statement about halfway through the interview): http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

After all this time, does he really still believe that he doesn't need to adjust to his personnel (at least with his guards) or am I taking this out of context?

Zone? Zone! Really? LOL. Man, you never give up this weird fixation on zone defense being the answer. That's funny. Thanks for the Sunday laugh.

 

[mathboy]

Yep.

According to what a highly regarded Lafayette area bb recruit has allegedly said, Painter is just an uninspiring, even boring recruiter who doesn't sell a great vision to prospective players.

Add the ridiculous rigid philosophy on players conforming to a system that doesn't excite players to want to play in it instead of evaluating and adapting a system to match the players talents and making the team experience more enjoyable.

Boom you have what we've all witnessed for what? 11 years

These are very significant reasons why CMP struggles.

This is interesting. As usual, all-the-way-now comes in with some sort of strange flame bait. You got anything to back this up with? What ridiculous rigidity have you seen? Have you heard how excited the players are this year, and last year too? Why do you post this crap? Me thinks you are just a non-Purdue troll attempting to create problems here. You can join Mogul in the trash heap as far as I am concerned.

By the way, what we have witnessed for the last 11 years is a Purdue Team that was often ranked in the top 10 of the country. Boom. Nice place to be. All we need to do is to translate that into NCAA success. That will happen or not, but right now, we seem to be on the right track.

 

[BoilerAndy]

I agreed with most of what Painter had to say and he and the players keep saying that this team is working on something "new" defensively (I'm hoping that means some zone formations so that Haas and Swanigan aren't out on the perimeter often in man D, pick-and-roll situations). However, I did take exception when he was talking about Carsen Edwards and how CE has to adjust to Purdue but that Painter doesn't have to adjust to CE's game. Some of the best college coaches ever, such as Mike Krzyzewski, have stated in recent years how each team they coach is unique in its parts and that HE adjusts his coaching style and strategies, based on his personnel. Apparently, Painter still doesn't believe in that. If you haven't seen it already, here is a link to the GBL interview page (Painter makes that type of statement about halfway through the interview): http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

After all this time, does he really still believe that he doesn't need to adjust to his personnel (at least with his guards) or am I taking this out of context?

Would I be surprised to learn that Painter did NOT say that he "doesn't have to adjust to CE's game." Painter has given reasons to be criticized, but do you have to repeatedly stoop to blatant dishonesty?

 

[nagemj02]

For those of you disagreeing with me, WATCH THE INTERVIEW AND LISTEN TO HIS COMMENTS when he's talking about Carsen Edwards: http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

 

[nagemj02]

I think that you are taking the statement out of the context. Painter has always adjusted his schemes to match the strengths of his teams. I mentioned examples in a recent thread, but compare 2011-12 to 2014-15, as an example.

What he meant is that each player needs to put aside his personnel agenda for the good of the team. Biggie talked about learning this in a recent interview as well.

best response so far

 

[Heller]

For those of you disagreeing with me, WATCH THE INTERVIEW AND LISTEN TO HIS COMMENTS when he's talking about Carsen Edwards: http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

I've heard other interviews on Carsen and basically no one is trying to crack his game. Carsen played on a ream where he was a shoot first guard which happens a lot in AAU and HS. Plus he is the only Freshman on the roster so he is getting a lot of constructive criticism on running the offense and not just hunting a shot. He will be fine this much ado about nothing.

 

[tjreese]

Yep.

According to what a highly regarded Lafayette area bb recruit has allegedly said, Painter is just an uninspiring, even boring recruiter who doesn't sell a great vision to prospective players.

Add the ridiculous rigid philosophy on players conforming to a system that doesn't excite players to want to play in it instead of evaluating and adapting a system to match the players talents and making the team experience more enjoyable.

Boom you have what we've all witnessed for what? 11 years

These are very significant reasons why CMP struggles.

I'm on a phone and so this will be short...but what is rigid in a read offense? What is rigid in a man defense? He could. be uninspiring, but not sure about the others

 

[mathboy]

For those of you disagreeing with me, WATCH THE INTERVIEW AND LISTEN TO HIS COMMENTS when he's talking about Carsen Edwards: http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

I did, and I still disagree with you that there is any sort of issue with what was said.

 

[Inspector100]

best response so far

So now you are grading our comments to your dribble.

 

[BoilerAndy]

For those of you disagreeing with me, WATCH THE INTERVIEW AND LISTEN TO HIS COMMENTS when he's talking about Carsen Edwards: http://wlfi.com/2016/10/05/gold-and-black-live-for-oct-7/

I listened again and still don't see how you could twist what Painter said into what you wrote.

 

[Dryfly88]

Nage: I listened to it twice and I still don't get where you're going with this?

 

[SIBoiler2]

Nage: I listened to it twice and I still don't get where you're going with this?

He's going over the cliff. Typical nag post that he will twist and turn until we are all sick of it. Then a couple weeks of sane posts followed by a new restatement of his agenda to rip Painter.1

 

[BoiledSteel]

He's going over the cliff. Typical nag post that he will twist and turn until we are all sick of it. Then a couple weeks of sane posts followed by a new restatement of his agenda to rip Painter.1

They have to reach for things now. After Griffiths exposed the administration and pretty much negated any foundation they have for an argument anymore, they essentially only have these out-of-context posts to try and fall back on.

What I don't get is why the pure hatred by Painter by a few on here? Did he run over their dog or something? Because the posts now from them are so ridiculous that they have to be coming from a place of hate.

 

[FLAG HUNTER]

its easy for us fans to sit back and nit pick on all the mistakes a coach makes and say he should have done better, maybe Painter should have done better, but then again what about all the games the team has won, it goes both ways for the negative people, I think if Painter would do a little better in the NCAA then that would quiet a lot of people, I think Painter is a good coach and will continue to do a good job, maybe not win the NCAA but no team will play Purdue and feel like the win is already in the books

 

[mathboy]

They have to reach for things now. After Griffiths exposed the administration and pretty much negated any foundation they have for an argument anymore, they essentially only have these out-of-context posts to try and fall back on.

What I don't get is why the pure hatred by Painter by a few on here? Did he run over their dog or something? Because the posts now from them are so ridiculous that they have to be coming from a place of hate.

Painter did not reach the Final Four every year he coached. In fact he has not yet reached it. Consequently, spoiled kids, used to getting everything they want, decide that they are going to hate on whoever is the most prominent person unable or unwilling to give them what they want.

I think it is a characteristic of our me-focused generation. They are good folks, but too used to getting what they want, when they want it. If you look at the situation with their perspective, you can understand the unreasoning dislike of any coach or player who "fails them".

These "want it now" types look for any clue or sign on which to hang their faulty logic. Hence, somehow Painter's interview seemed to them to indicate some sort of inflexibility, that seemed to damage the ability for this player or that player to play "their game". Looked at reasonably, most of us understand, but for those looking to justify their odd misplaced anger, they find bogey men where none exist.

 

[tjreese]

Painter did not reach the Final Four every year he coached. In fact he has not yet reached it. Consequently, spoiled kids, used to getting everything they want, decide that they are going to hate on whoever is the most prominent person unable or unwilling to give them what they want.

I think it is a characteristic of our me-focused generation. They are good folks, but too used to getting what they want, when they want it. If you look at the situation with their perspective, you can understand the unreasoning dislike of any coach or player who "fails them".

These "want it now" types look for any clue or sign on which to hang their faulty logic. Hence, somehow Painter's interview seemed to them to indicate some sort of inflexibility, that seemed to damage the ability for this player or that player to play "their game". Looked at reasonably, most of us understand, but for those looking to justify their odd misplaced anger, they find bogey men where none exist.

Well, I wasn't going to state that as an explanation for those that want a different coach. However, in a general sense there is much truth to what you are saying in society and it is TOTALLY predictable that society would get to this place that you describe. The rampant growth and spread across this country never happened as a result of the food that was eaten or the air that was breathed, but there IS a logical explanation for what appears to be much different than years ago. Sure the media has played a role, but the government schools (K-12) have extended the "Child-Centered" school approach well past the first couple of years of elementary and into the high school. The progressive ideology in pedagogy does NOT want the sage on the stage, but the guide on the side...

No surprises in society from where I sit...

 

[Inspector100]

Well, I wasn't going to state that as an explanation for those that want a different coach. However, in a general sense there is much truth to what you are saying in society and it is TOTALLY predictable that society would get to this place that you describe. The rampant growth and spread across this country never happened as a result of the food that was eaten or the air that was breathed, but there IS a logical explanation for what appears to be much different than years ago. Sure the media has played a role, but the government schools (K-12) have extended the "Child-Centered" school approach well past the first couple of years of elementary and into the high school. The progressive ideology in pedagogy does NOT want the sage on the stage, but the guide on the side...

No surprises in society from where I sit...

ped·a·go·gy
ˈpedəˌɡäjē/
noun

1. the method and practice of teaching, especially as an academic subject or theoretical concept.
   "the relationship between applied linguistics and language pedagogy"

Very well done my man!