Honest Truth

[TheMogul]

We need guards.....

Purdue has a stagnant offense and it does not create enough movement by itself to get players open.

Last year our lead guards got outscored most games. The few times when PJ (Johnny Hill) and Ray had big games we either beat good teams (MSU) or destroyed bad ones.

I commend PJ for not turning the ball over but I would much rather have a Lewis Jackson type player manning the point.

Our current strategy is to post our bigs up on the block and then play inside out. This strategy is fine against weaker teams and it does play to our strengths but has it has very little upside. When we play against good teams that have big and athletic players they force Hammons/Haas to receive the ball ten feet from the basket instead of on the block. This results in lower percentage shots and when they do kick it to Cline/Mathias the defenders helping down do not have far to travel to get back into defensive position.

I would rather have a guard that can put elite teams on their heels even if he averages 2 TO's a game.

We need to change our offense, recruit different players (attacking guards), accept mediocrity, or fire Painter.

Us missing out on Jaren Jackson Jr is unfortunate but it is not a big problem.

 

[PU52Chevy]

Guards are always good in a motion offense.....scoring guards even better.

We have them now in confident Mathias, PJ, Cline and young eager CE.

We have the solid SF/PF and PF/C group as well and energy guys like Smotherman and Taylor.

We will win many games this year and if we hit our free throws we will stay in every game this year because of it and come out on top.

Keys this year are working the offense and getting high percentage shots, hitting free throws, rebounding, staying out of foul trouble and having fun.

Stress having fun.....I know I do as a fan...wish you all would relax and have fun too.

Purdue is a top 17 all time program in NCAA...we will get to the next level, so just support positive and have fun watching them!

More Championships are on the way and banners will come too (they take a good team and luck)

Boiler Up!

 

[TheMogul]

I agree partially.

You do win games by doing all the small things.

And I love the potential of CE.

But having a stagnant offense is a HUGE ISSUE.

Purdue doesn't have enough movement and it is a big contributor to us underwhelming.

It is good to be positive, which I am, but you can't turn a blind eye to things.

 

[TheMogul]

I'm relaxed but still I am pointing out what Painters single biggest issue is. It is not recruiting, it is his offense.

 

[TC4THREE]

I agree from the aspect that I think the biggest difference between Painter's teams that won in the NCAA tournament versus the last two years where we lost were the quality of our guards.

 

[Do Dah Day]

I agree from the aspect that I think the biggest difference between Painter's teams that won in the NCAA tournament versus the last two years where we lost were the quality of our guards.

At least their ability to stretch the floor. If they progress as I am sure they will, they will stretch the floor this year. When your go-to guys are both big, that puts limits on aspects of the game. Our go-to guy may still be big, but we will have much better outside go-to guys this year. Unless we see no growth in our SGs and CE doesn't progress. But I KNOW they will.

 

[*Shockerrr*]

Just hope we smash MSU by 30 to prove a point.

 

[DG10]

Just hope we smash MSU by 30 to prove a point.

Yeah, not likely to happen, but even if it did (as Purdue has hammered them a time or two already), the point is a pretty weak one, as the point that has been made repeatedly is that Izzo is able to successfully come into the state and take away Painter's/Purdue's top target on a consistent basis...and that point is far more of an important point than a meaningless win during the course of a season.

 

[tjreese]

I'm relaxed but still I am pointing out what Painters single biggest issue is. It is not recruiting, it is his offense.

I try to stay out of many things that have little to do with basketball, but am intrigued with your comment about Purdue's offense. However, is it the offense you dislike or the players that bring about a certain offensive focus because they are two different things. If it is the offense, what offense do you want...dribble drive, more sets, more defined roles, offense as a result of D...and why?

 

[TheMogul]

It is our offense.

Our bigs barely move. They stand and try and get deep position which only works against bad teams. Since they aren't moving big athletic teams have a pretty easy time denying Hammons/Haas the ball in the deep post.

We are a an unselfish team but our guards and forwards haven't shown the ability to put a defense "on their heels" and get to the rim. Getting to the rim allows cutters to get easy looks and forces the defense out of position.When Lewis Jackson and Kelsey Barlow played they were able to break a defense down by themselves and then Smith, Byrd, Hummel, Moore and company would cut or make the defense pay for being out of position.

To answer your question...
When we have athletic guards that can break down a defense and pass ((((hint Bryson Scott and Ronnie... didn't pass)))) our offense looks good.

However, it is hard to find guards of that type and when we don't have that type of guard play our offense doesn't create enough movement to make us efficient.

If you have watched the Spurs in recent years they aren't the most athletic team but yet they have some penetration and lots of ball movement so they get lots of open shots close to the basket. We do not.

 

[TheMogul]

I try to stay out of many things that have little to do with basketball, but am intrigued with your comment about Purdue's offense. However, is it the offense you dislike or the players that bring about a certain offensive focus because they are two different things. If it is the offense, what offense do you want...dribble drive, more sets, more defined roles, offense as a result of D...and why?

I'm not partial to a specific offense. I believe we use a motion yet we barely have any movement. Too many basketball coaches are teaching kids to run plays and yet not explaining to the players how to move with and without the ball.

I have played with and against countless high school basketball studs who look lost when not running specific plays.

 

[CallItAComeback]

It is our offense.

Our bigs barely move. They stand and try and get deep position which only works against bad teams. Since they aren't moving big athletic teams have a pretty easy time denying Hammons/Haas the ball in the deep post.

We are a an unselfish team but our guards and forwards haven't shown the ability to put a defense "on their heels" and get to the rim. Getting to the rim allows cutters to get easy looks and forces the defense out of position.When Lewis Jackson and Kelsey Barlow played they were able to break a defense down by themselves and then Smith, Byrd, Hummel, Moore and company would cut or make the defense pay for being out of position.

To answer your question...
When we have athletic guards that can break down a defense and pass ((((hint Bryson Scott and Ronnie... didn't pass)))) our offense looks good.

However, it is hard to find guards of that type and when we don't have that type of guard play our offense doesn't create enough movement to make us efficient.

If you have watched the Spurs in recent years they aren't the most athletic team but yet they have some penetration and lots of ball movement so they get lots of open shots close to the basket. We do not.

I think CMP has realized this. The type of guards he is trying to recruit are slighty more on the offensive side. Also, I would consider Tillman and JJJ more of the mobile type of bigs. So Painter knows what he needs to have to be where he wants to be. He is just having trouble executing his plan. It is hard to recruit players when they look at our team and cannot relate their play style to our play style.

 

[TheMogul]

Yes I agree to an extent. Painter has made seemed to adjust his recruiting and other things in recent years. But he still hasn't done much to improve our offensive movement.

 

[tjreese]

I'm not partial to a specific offense. I believe we use a motion yet we barely have any movement. Too many basketball coaches are teaching kids to run plays and yet not explaining to the players how to move with and without the ball.

I have played with and against countless high school basketball studs who look lost when not running specific plays.

What you have inadvertently said was that it was the players. Motion is a read offense...with no sets. Matt adds a few sets for specific calls. I'm fully aware of players in high school not understanding the game and running plays. If there is anything that allows freedom it is a motion offense...which Purdue uses. If the bigs are not moving, perhaps the skill set as an individual and in chemistry with the other players is the issue, not that a coach tells them not to move. I have no desire to denigrate anyone, but it is ludicrous to take an offense that allows "reading" the defense and reacting to "whatever" is available and say it is confining. Motion is the aversion to confinement and it provides so much freedom that teams sometimes need a few sets to bring continuity to the offense. Your big comments would be altered with two athletic good 6'9" players rather than an AJ or Haas that are not as mobile. However, Purdue has what they have and are trying to utilize the strength of the team. Do you not think motion couldn't be ran with two 4's instead of a 4 and 5?

If a group of students do poor on a test, it doesn't mean the test was written poorly or didn't cover all the material...it may mean the results were limited due to the students not having the aptitude or the work ethic to reach a height above a typical result for a given aptitude.

I apologize if it seems I'm picking on your comments, because that is not my intention. There are many that share your sentiments. There are many that stand on the roof tops and yell as loud as possible about problems and such and have no idea of any specifics (again not directed at you..just the forum in general).

There is nothing in a motion offense that says that guards cannot score, cannot drive, cannot shoot on the perimeter. There is nothing in a motion offense that limits "ANY" player other than the individual player's skill set as an item and THAT skill set within the context of the best team...nothing.

The problem is in getting enough talent and THAT is not totally on a coach. The hype of a tourney generated by the media and perpetuated here by many makes an icon of certain programs and coaches that empirical data may reduce to something less, but that has hurt Matt recently. Personally, I want the player good enough to get offers from major programs, that is versatile, fits into the Purdue culture and not enticed by being on a loaded team, but rather says internally...the boys and I are gonna kick your a$$ and believe it. Then we have a warrior.

 

[BoilerBiker]

The hype of a tourney generated by the media and perpetuated here by many makes an icon of certain programs and coaches that empirical data may reduce to something less, but that has hurt Matt recently.

Huh?
They hype the tourney for money since that is most of NCAAs revenue.
And nearly every sport ends their season with a tournament to crown a champ (Im trying to think of a sport that didn't do this down to my little league) .
If there is no tourney, do you end the season with reg season conference champs only?

 

[BeachinSteveO]

College basketball is a guards game. You are only as good as your best guard.

 

[tjreese]

yeah...that happens. I'm just saying it has been elevated in importance due to the media primarily. Did you think it got elevated another way?

 

[tjreese]

College basketball is a guards game. You are only as good as your best guard.

Teh last two year with the rule emphasis has made it more perimeter..no question. No question that guards are very important. However, the population statistics suggest that it is easier to find a good guard than a good big man due to population numbers.

 

[Inspector100]

The bigs don't move because they are setting screens. At least when our team plays fast and the sf and guards are cutting as they should. There are times when the bigs have carved out their space and are waiting for the ball movement to put them in the perfect spot. I don't like that part of it. I would like to see some movement between the pf and center down low to put the defenders in jeopardy. Maybe it could be any other player and the center, not just the pf. Just not a fan of "post up" basketball. But our players have to be in tremendous physical condition to run this offense efficiently an entire half, and then every half. I am not sure we have that.

 

[TheMogul]

What you have inadvertently said was that it was the players. Motion is a read offense...with no sets. Matt adds a few sets for specific calls. I'm fully aware of players in high school not understanding the game and running plays. If there is anything that allows freedom it is a motion offense...which Purdue uses. If the bigs are not moving, perhaps the skill set as an individual and in chemistry with the other players is the issue, not that a coach tells them not to move. I have no desire to denigrate anyone, but it is ludicrous to take an offense that allows "reading" the defense and reacting to "whatever" is available and say it is confining. Motion is the aversion to confinement and it provides so much freedom that teams sometimes need a few sets to bring continuity to the offense. Your big comments would be altered with two athletic good 6'9" players rather than an AJ or Haas that are not as mobile. However, Purdue has what they have and are trying to utilize the strength of the team. Do you not think motion couldn't be ran with two 4's instead of a 4 and 5?

If a group of students do poor on a test, it doesn't mean the test was written poorly or didn't cover all the material...it may mean the results were limited due to the students not having the aptitude or the work ethic to reach a height above a typical result for a given aptitude.

I apologize if it seems I'm picking on your comments, because that is not my intention. There are many that share your sentiments. There are many that stand on the roof tops and yell as loud as possible about problems and such and have no idea of any specifics (again not directed at you..just the forum in general).

There is nothing in a motion offense that says that guards cannot score, cannot drive, cannot shoot on the perimeter. There is nothing in a motion offense that limits "ANY" player other than the individual player's skill set as an item and THAT skill set within the context of the best team...nothing.

The problem is in getting enough talent and THAT is not totally on a coach. The hype of a tourney generated by the media and perpetuated here by many makes an icon of certain programs and coaches that empirical data may reduce to something less, but that has hurt Matt recently. Personally, I want the player good enough to get offers from major programs, that is versatile, fits into the Purdue culture and not enticed by being on a loaded team, but rather says internally...the boys and I are gonna kick your a$$ and believe it. Then we have a warrior.

Okay so I probably won't hit all your points but here it goes...

If an offense doesn't create enough good shots by itself (spoiler... ours doesn't) then the offense needs to be fixed. As I was saying players can make up for a bad offense but that is a counter measure not a way to fix a problem.

In our motion the spacing is great but everyone passes the ball around the perimeter they don't create anything. We don't have many off ball screens, our bigs only screen at the top of the three point line, our bigs basically the only times our bigs move are block to block. Imagine if Hammons would have been able to catch the ball off of a screen or a cut.

Hammons is/was a very mobile player. I can count on my fingers how many people had similar agility, hands, size, and skill in cbb.

I'm not saying motion offense is bad. I'm saying our motion offense is bad. Painter can call our offense whatever name he wants but it is extremely stagnant.

Our offense did not have enough movement every game last year and this leads me to believe that Painter is accepting the lack of movement, not that the players aren't doing as Painter asks.

I would rather Painter tell our players to just go out move, cut, pick n roll, pass than to see the same offense we had last year. It would hurt the team early on but in the long run they would be better off.

 

[tjreese]

Okay so I probably won't hit all your points but here it goes...

If an offense doesn't create enough good shots by itself (spoiler... ours doesn't) then the offense needs to be fixed. As I was saying players can make up for a bad offense but that is a counter measure not a way to fix a problem.

In our motion the spacing is great but everyone passes the ball around the perimeter they don't create anything. We don't have many off ball screens, our bigs only screen at the top of the three point line, our bigs basically the only times our bigs move are block to block. Imagine if Hammons would have been able to catch the ball off of a screen or a cut.

Hammons is/was a very mobile player. I can count on my fingers how many people had similar agility, hands, size, and skill in cbb.

I'm not saying motion offense is bad. I'm saying our motion offense is bad. Painter can call our offense whatever name he wants but it is extremely stagnant.

Our offense did not have enough movement every game last year and this leads me to believe that Painter is accepting the lack of movement, not that the players aren't doing as Painter asks.

I would rather Painter tell our players to just go out move, cut, pick n roll, pass than to see the same offense we had last year. It would hurt the team early on but in the long run they would be better off.

I don't disagree with your concerns, just your reason for your concerns. If a player can't create due to a lack of quickness...if a player cannot get a shot without help...if a player can't dribble and has to get the ball deep...we are talking about athleticism and what a player brings to the table...not an offense. which perimeter player could you not belly up on with tight D if desired? How much of a threat was AJ to put the ball on the court? I like the pieces Purdue has, but there is not a single player that is a good combination of skill and athleticism. Biggie is very skilled and has a warrior mentality, but he is not athletic. The reality is the players on this team were Purdue players when the rule emphasis changed that put a different demeanor on the perimeter. Look, I want to guard Cline tight, Dakota reasonably tight but aware of the pullup, Pj tight...and carsen with some space. I'm going to guard Vince tight as he isn't quick. Basil...prove you can work the perimeter game. Haas, front on low and mid posts. Biggie can get it at the three, but deny up to the FT line. Course tight on one pass away and help in more than one pass away..and a skip is more than one pass away. I think Purdue can be very good, but there are physical limitations in this team. None of this is to dismiss the heart and skills of the players...just saying that finding the skill and athleticism in a player at Purdue is tough to find. Instead it must be more cerebral in a game that the NCAA is trying to make more athletic by shortening the shot clock and punishing tight D on the perimeter.

 

[BoilerBulldog]

Yeah, not likely to happen, but even if it did (as Purdue has hammered them a time or two already), the point is a pretty weak one, as the point that has been made repeatedly is that Izzo is able to successfully come into the state and take away Painter's/Purdue's top target on a consistent basis...and that point is far more of an important point than a meaningless win during the course of a season.

I thought the point of basketball was to win on the court? When did it change to who can recruit the most stars?

 

[TheMogul]

I don't disagree with your concerns, just your reason for your concerns. If a player can't create due to a lack of quickness...if a player cannot get a shot without help...if a player can't dribble and has to get the ball deep...we are talking about athleticism and what a player brings to the table...not an offense. which perimeter player could you not belly up on with tight D if desired? How much of a threat was AJ to put the ball on the court? I like the pieces Purdue has, but there is not a single player that is a good combination of skill and athleticism. Biggie is very skilled and has a warrior mentality, but he is not athletic. The reality is the players on this team were Purdue players when the rule emphasis changed that put a different demeanor on the perimeter. Look, I want to guard Cline tight, Dakota reasonably tight but aware of the pullup, Pj tight...and carsen with some space. I'm going to guard Vince tight as he isn't quick. Basil...prove you can work the perimeter game. Haas, front on low and mid posts. Biggie can get it at the three, but deny up to the FT line. Course tight on one pass away and help in more than one pass away..and a skip is more than one pass away. I think Purdue can be very good, but there are physical limitations in this team. None of this is to dismiss the heart and skills of the players...just saying that finding the skill and athleticism in a player at Purdue is tough to find. Instead it must be more cerebral in a game that the NCAA is trying to make more athletic by shortening the shot clock and punishing tight D on the perimeter.

If a team has proper spacing, cuts, passes, and screens right you don't have to be the most athletic in the world.

Purdue isn't an elite basketball program but we are well above average. If we don't have the athletic players to make CMP's offense flow now, we never will.

Having great athletes allows average offenses to break down the defense.

We don't and will never have amazing athletes and that is fine.

End of story man. If you want to watch an offense move I will be in Purdue co rec next weekend. I am not athletic but my team always wins...................

 

[tjreese]

If a team has proper spacing, cuts, passes, and screens right you don't have to be the most athletic in the world.

Purdue isn't an elite basketball program but we are well above average. If we don't have the athletic players to make CMP's offense flow now, we never will.

Having great athletes allows average offenses to break down the defense.

We don't and will never have amazing athletes and that is fine.

End of story man. If you want to watch an offense move I will be in Purdue co rec next weekend. I am not athletic but my team always wins...................

 

[tjreese]

spacing only happens by being a threat inside and outside. If you are slow I can recover quickly and don't have to be on you. If you are no threat inside..you are no threat inside. The defense doesn't react to what you want to do unless they are much quicker. Instead, they understand your strengths and weaknesses and attempt to take things away hopefully leaving you with the option they want. I suspect if one did the review they would find that Purdue other than those horrible years under Matt would find a pretty efficient offense. I feel pretty confident on that. I have never ever known a team to guard whether in a straight zone,match-up, man or an array of defenses all the players on the other team the same or on the other team the same with different players on your team. You are always aware of the space to be covered and the time to do that. If you don't want to play Haas, then the offense will be different. If you want to play Carsen, Dakota, Cline Vince and Biggie you can play another way. The reason all that is true is because it has nothing to do with the offense, but with the players..the particular combination of skill and athletic ability make the team a threat in a different manner. Same goes with Robbie, Lewjack, Smith, Bryd . Different "PLAYERS" allow different things. Course, unlike football those players must defend as well. If you still believe that a team will defend all players the same, then we will have to disagree. A defense understands your strengths and tries to take them away and make you do things you are not very good at doing.

Now then , I think Purdue will be very good this year, but it will be because of some size, team work, high basketball IQ and a threat to shoot the ball well with the inside presence being strong. Purdue has "versatile" players that I like and prefer over athletic limited players. Purdue will have trouble with fours and fives that are somewhat athletic and can face up and put the ball on the court as well as defending quick perimeter players well enough to contain the dribble. THAT can flip good or bad when Haas sits because when a key player goes out the dynamics change even if the read offense doesn't. Purdue will then look towards another offensive advantage while adjusting defensively.

 

[Schnelk]

When Dakota, Ryan and/or Carsen start to consistently hit from the perimeter our collective attitudes towards the offense will change dramatically to the positive...I predict.

 

[nagemj02]

I'm relaxed but still I am pointing out what Painters single biggest issue is. It is not recruiting, it is his offense.

His defensive inflexibility is an issue as well. Haas shouldn't be guarding players out beyond the 3PT line, but he's been doing just that in instructional workouts in high-ball screen situations (such as a time Carsen Edwards dunked over him) because Painter thinks man-to-man is the only defense that can be played in basketball. Many legendary coaches (perhaps Mike Krzyzewski and Dean Smith most notably, Jim Boeheim as well) had or have several defensive schemes that they practice(d) and employ(ed) at different moments in most games, yet some fans here have in the past made the excuse that it's (paraphrasing) "impossible to excel at more than one defensive scheme: there's not enough time to work on other defenses", which is a big pile of BS.