Was going to avoid this, but I will say the battle of you two trollish people has been a bit entertaining. Really made me appreciate my life and how I am not either one of you.
That and adding you two to ignore really helps clean up the clutter.
Here's my rant.....
- Thread starter bonefish1
- Start date
That and adding you two to ignore really helps clean up the clutter.
Johnny Hill is a better version of what Bryson would have been this year.
Tucking your tail and running, looks like I was right about you. You aren't a Boiler as I have proven, you're probably some 40 year old pedophile living in your parents basement and have nothing to add both here or to the human race. You can't counter anything I have said to you so this is all you are left with. I already knew I was better than you, this just proved it.
Magi, I recommend that you slow down on the insults. First they don't contribute to the discussion, and secondly they don't correct the strange opinions of some of our more odd posters. Instead refute weird statements with facts, if you have them, and let go some of the urge to smack them (verbally at least).
When someone says we haven't been to the FF because... and they post an unrelated cause, without truly understanding the causal effect of the result, I know it can be difficult to read. However, they are entitled to their opinion, no matter how off-the-wall. All you can do is reserve the right to laugh at them.
Let's keep it civil oout there. We all want the same thing. Boiler up!
This is very true. Tum Tum Narn was one of the worst PG's in the BIG, but it did not prevent an otherwise talented MSU team from making the FF. MSU had, and has, great basketball talent, good coaching, and a very lucky draw in the pairings. PJ Thompson is a much better PG than Narn, any way you want to look at it. We don't have someone who plays like Valentine, and we don't have the outside shooters to match up well against MSU. The ball bounces crazy all the time. We beat them anyway. We should be celebrating that victory!
Magi, I recommend that you slow down on the insults. First they don't contribute to the discussion, and secondly they don't correct the strange opinions of some of our more odd posters. Instead refute weird statements with facts, if you have them, and let go some of the urge to smack them (verbally at least).
When someone says we haven't been to the FF because... and they post an unrelated cause, without truly understanding the causal effect of the result, I know it can be difficult to read. However, they are entitled to their opinion, no matter how off-the-wall. All you can do is reserve the right to laugh at them.
Let's keep it civil oout there. We all want the same thing. Boiler up!
This guy has been banned several times for this same schtick. It will get worse before GBI bans him.
I think you focus so much on Purdue that you do not see the game for what it is across many schools. We lose big leads (2-3 times), but so do other teams - good teams. Watch Sports Center and listen. It happens all the time. It is not a particular failing of Purdue's team.
Second, we might make the FF, but we are not well built for that run. We have potential, but we are in no way a favorite. Furthermore, many, many favorites don't even sniff the second weekend of the NCAAT, so let's not let our expectations get the better of us.
You had an interesting rant until you got to Bryson. He had a lot of fire, but he was never that skilled, nor was he ever mature enough to lead this team. The UM guards would have eaten him alive, and spit out the bones. Painter did not run him off. He wanted Bryson to stay with the team. Please stop with that crap. Painter sets expectations and requirements. Those are neutral, and apply to all the kids. If Bryson couldn't measure up, that's on him. He couldn't make the grade. The teacher tells you what you need to do to pass. If you do not meet those requirements, the teacher did not "run you off", you just failed. You are not the 'victim', and the teacher is not some sort of evil oppressor. Please just stop those kinds of statements. All you do is give ammunition to trolls.
The first time Johnny Hill drove to his left/used his left hand to finish he was one ahead of Bryson. I understand Bryson was an instate kid and a popular guy, but he is not what this team is missing.
Agree to disagree. Furthermore, no way to really qualify it to boot. I like Hill but think Bryson finishes at the rim at a higher percentage.
He was in the doghouse because he was not doing the things Painter asked of him. Make no mistake, Painter wanted him on the team, but he had to do the right things. He had to fulfil his end of the bargain.
I saw improvements and do believe he could have been what was needed even though he was not there at the time.
He was in the doghouse because he was not doing the things Painter asked of him. Make no mistake, Painter wanted him on the team, but he had to do the right things. He had to fulfil his end of the bargain.
So, is that why PU hasn't put a PG in the NBA in ? how long? Is it the Keady/Painter philosophy of a PG is supposed to be a facilitator (passer), defender and not a creator/scorer or primary point of the offense?
Don't get me wrong. It's great having skilled big men, but like the QB, the PG is still the most important position on the floor, but that position needs to create and score, not just pass and defend.
Personally, I believe the mentality of 'defense first' is one reason PU comes up short in the NCAA every year.
I think you focus so much on Purdue that you do not see the game for what it is across many schools. We lose big leads (2-3 times), but so do other teams - good teams. Watch Sports Center and listen. It happens all the time. It is not a particular failing of Purdue's team.
Second, we might make the FF, but we are not well built for that run. We have potential, but we are in no way a favorite. Furthermore, many, many favorites don't even sniff the second weekend of the NCAAT, so let's not let our expectations get the better of us.
You had an interesting rant until you got to Bryson. He had a lot of fire, but he was never that skilled, nor was he ever mature enough to lead this team. The UM guards would have eaten him alive, and spit out the bones. Painter did not run him off. He wanted Bryson to stay with the team. Please stop with that crap. Painter sets expectations and requirements. Those are neutral, and apply to all the kids. If Bryson couldn't measure up, that's on him. He couldn't make the grade. The teacher tells you what you need to do to pass. If you do not meet those requirements, the teacher did not "run you off", you just failed. You are not the 'victim', and the teacher is not some sort of evil oppressor. Please just stop those kinds of statements. All you do is give ammunition to trolls.
If you're not building for a FF run, what are you building for? PU has all the pieces in place this year, except for a dual threat PG.
I mean, I've seen MAC schools with better PGs than Purdue, and when I say 'better', I'm mainly referring to offensive skills. Guys that can get a shot late in the shot clock or aren't afraid to take an open jumper because Painter wants them to pound it inside.
Look, I love Purdue as much as anybody here, but I believe there's a problem with the Keady/Painter system philosophy that's prevented a FF appearance in the last 35 years.
You aren't wrong in your assessment and I think that is why Painter is bringing in Carsen Edwards. I know I keep bringing him up, but he directly seems to fill the hole you mention. Defense however, helps you win games when your shooting is inconsistent IMO so I can understand the focus on it. Especially with not knowing how the new rules this year would impact the game in general.
That said, I hope with the addition of a playmaking PG the offensive philosophy changes to let that type of PG flourish.
I agree. If Bronson Koening or Bryant Mcintosh are on this roster then the teams FF chances absolutely sky rocket.
I agree with you on Edwards. I think he could be exactly what this team needs. I just hope Painter takes advantage of a player with his skill set and let's him do some freelancing, create some opportunities, etc.
As we know, there's a perception among these types of players that Painter is going to stick with the 'system' (whatever that is) and that you're not going to be able to showcase your skills (which, let's be honest. A lot of players are looking to prove themselves to NBA scouts. I think MP does a good job of showcasing his 4 and 5 position but not the PG position).
Could be because he's never really had a talented enough PG to showcase while he's had frontcourt talent.
Is it because he doesn't recruit that type of player or those types of players aren't interested in playing for him?
I think you slightly misinterpret my statement. Of course you build for a national championship. Every coach tries to build that team. However, in the end, you have to play with the players that come to your school. We have some good players, but not "great" players on our team. The coach has made them better than their simple sum. However, we need better players to move from "a team with potential to reach the FF", to "a team that is a favorite to make the FF". See the difference? We don't have enough of those types of players that are what I would call "high-end". Those are the Valentine's, Ferrell's, and Trimble's. We can certainly beat those teams with those players because we may play better team basketball. The problem comes when you encounter a team with several of those players, and that team plays good team basketball - a team that is a favorite to make the FF.
Are we there yet? No. Are we going in the right direction? Yes, IMHO.
Personally in think it's the latter. If I recall right, there was even some "dirty laundry" floating aboutique basically saying that if you're a pg, don't play at Purdue. That isn't verbatim of course, but something like that was floating around. Got so bad Painter had to make a comment about it I think.
I do think there is some negative recruiting going on by some schools that are competing with Purdue for players.
I don't think MSU is the source, even though we often compete for the same players. They don't need to negatively recruit since they have recently loaded up on high-end players, and their reputation will naturally bring players into the fold. They can stay positive.
Maybe the coach that complains most about negative recruiting is the source for the same crap that is focused on Purdue? I have evidence to support this other than a distant character assessment, and the experience that often those who cry foul are those most likely to foul themselves.
Correct, I think that's why Hyron Edwards decommitted. As we know, perception is everything. Also, I'm sure all the coaches MP is competing with for guards are telling those guys the same thing: "You don't want to play in Painters' system, all you're going to do is play full court D and dump the ball inside. You won't get to freelance or create, because if you do, you end up on the bench".
Bryson and his brother Brenton's biggest problems are their attitudes and their mouth. I watched them in High School often and they both were beyond cocky. They would both run over to the other teams student section and taunt their fans - sometimes drawing technicals. Their coach did nothing to discipline them. It was pretty sad at the coaches lack of control. Brenton got busted for pot at ISU and told the cops he was Bryson. The kids are a train wreck fueled by their own egos. That being said - Brenton is having a great year at ISU.
Good! I wouldn't want a player who's not cocky and doesn't think he's the best player on the floor. It's the coaches job to channel that energy into helping the team.
Do you not think every player on Kentucky's roster, every year, isn't cocky, has a massive ego and has attitude?
Hell, Chris Kramer was known for some of the same things when he was here.
Just like any coach, their job is manage a bunch of prima donna, egomaniacs into a team. You're going to have a combination of choir boys and thugs that you have to make work to win games. That's why the coaches are paid the big bucks.
I see your point but I am not absolutely sold that this is how things would have played out.
IMO, and that is all it is, I think that had Bryson stayed it would be no HILL, but there is no telling for sure. It is possible that coach could have STILL wanted a 3rd PG but I doubt it.
I think Hill does have a similar skillset to Scott, minus Scott's tendency to make plays for himself a few unnecessary times per game. I like that Hill's drives are more opportunistic - he doesn't start the play trying to penetrate but will take the opportunity if it's available late in the clock or off an offensive board. Because of that, Hill is hitting 56% of his shots. Scott was never that efficient - he hit 39% of his shots last year. I'd rather the extra possessions go through our centers who are both hitting over 50% of their attempts. Bryson could have been as good as Hill offensively if he were a more selective shot-taker, and he was probably a better defender. I think his game was influenced by internal competition with with A.Johnson and RJ - not a good thing when guard play wasn't the strength of the team.
Give me the combo of Hill and PJ any day. Surprisingly, PG isn't a problem this year IMO. Our problem is lack of consistency from guys who are billed as 3-point specialists, poor mid-range shot selection, and turnovers. We have good defense, rebounding, and inside presence - fix those other things and this team could compete with anyone in the country on any given night.
Last edited:
Just because they were confident on the court don't make them failures. That is really rude to say about a them when they were just 18 and 19. Bryson and Brenton are good kids off the court. Brenton made a dumb mistake at 19 years old, he should be able to have a second chance and not be so harshly judged.
I can't disagree with you. I think you are right on the money when it comes to second chances, and even third chances. I really think that is why Painter wanted Bryson to stay on the team, s he could work through his issues. It would have been the best thing for the kid. Painter knew it, and I think Bryson now realizes it.
It is okay to be cocky and confident, but you have to put in the hard work to make your self a player at the college level. It doesn't happen just because you are "confident" . I am sure you know this, and I think that is what folks are trying to say about the issue. Confidence is okay if you can back it up. Otherwise it is just noise.
I think you are in the minority on this issue. Bryson was a square peg instead of round meaning he just did not fit. He could have fit but he chose not to and it was his decision and his alone.
