Jacobsen to announce friday

[SCBoiler1]

Perhaps you don't care because you struggle to make the correlation.
But here, I'll help: It basically means that Painter can win a high % of games against evenly matched teams, he rarely (almost never) wins against teams that are more talented, and, unfortunately, has shown a disturbing propensity to be upset by very low seeds.
What all this translates to is March struggles and a lack of deep runs.

I don't necessarily disagree with some of your points about our back court talent but the whole moving on from Painter is kind of ridiculous.

If Painter didn't have such close ties to Purdue, a much bigger concern would be Painter moving on from us! We've been rated #1 at some point the last two years, we're rated in the top 3 this year and have some nice talent coming in next year but somehow "we could do better".

What makes Purdue basketball so special? We don't have a history of drawing in big time recruits. As many like to point out we haven't been to a FF in 40+ years. Before Painter got hired, we hadn't won a B1G Championship in 10 years. We don't have a legacy of NBA talent. So, what's the draw?

Purdue is currently the equivalent of Ohio State or Michigan in football or at the very least Penn State. I'm sure there are fans at those schools who think they deserve more but the other 11 or 12 B1G schools could only dream of competing at that level.

Again, back to my original question. What makes Purdue basketball so special?

I'll give you a clue. His initials are MP.

 

[northside100]

I disagree. I think there's a large contingent, especially posters here, who are kept up at night at the thought of Purdue getting a new basketball coach and the scary "what ifs" that scenario presents.

I stopped losing sleep over sports a long time ago but when there's an 80% chance that your new coach will be worse and a 30% chance that the new hire drives your program backwards significantly you should be scared of the prospect.

 

[northside100]

It's not the fact that a lesser talented team beats a more talented team. The issue is that it happens with freakish regularity to Painter coached teams in the tourney. In fact, historical regularity.
Once, maybe even twice over some period of time is an anomaly, 4 times in a row is a trend, and a bad one.
The other disturbing fact about Painter and his tourney teams is that they have only 1 time, beat a seed ranked more than 1 seed higher (the 1 seed differences are essentially pick-ems anyway).

What coaches consistently beat higher ranked teams in the tournament? I agree that Painter has not shown to be a great NCAAT coach to date but your data points could just as easily be deemed to be unlucky as representative of any type of causal relationship.

BTW, in no world does three data points (no clue where you get 4) represent any type of statistical trend.

 

[mathboy]

I disagree. I think there's a large contingent, especially posters here, who are kept up at night at the thought of Purdue getting a new basketball coach and the scary "what ifs" that scenario presents.

Painter will be Purdue’s coach until he decides to quit, or God forbid, something happens. He is a Purdue guy through and through, and widely recognized by experts in the field as one of the best coaches in the game. Your continued posting about how bad he is, and how we should replace him, is mostly just trolling folks on here. If this is your idea of positive social interaction, you’ve got far bigger problems.

 

[Jbigler1986]

I don't necessarily disagree with some of your points about our back court talent but the whole moving on from Painter is kind of ridiculous.

If Painter didn't have such close ties to Purdue, a much bigger concern would be Painter moving on from us! We've been rated #1 at some point the last two years, we're rated in the top 3 this year and have some nice talent coming in next year but somehow "we could do better".

What makes Purdue basketball so special? We don't have a history of drawing in big time recruits. As many like to point out we haven't been to a FF in 40+ years. Before Painter got hired, we hadn't won a B1G Championship in 10 years. We don't have a legacy of NBA talent. So, what's the draw?

Purdue is currently the equivalent of Ohio State or Michigan in football or at the very least Penn State. I'm sure there are fans at those schools who think they deserve more but the other 11 or 12 B1G schools could only dream of competing at that level.

Again, back to my original question. What makes Purdue basketball so special?

I'll give you a clue. His initials are MP.

Those football teams have made head coaching changes.

 

[BoilerDaddy]

I think that the backcourt talent is clearly trending in the right direction, regardless of what Harris decides.

I don’t think most Purdue fans appreciate what a great career Smith is going to have, not to mention how good he is right now. He is running the team like no Purdue point guard that I have ever seen. Under Painter, the closest I have seen is Lewis Jackson, whose game was far more limited, or Carsen Edwards, who wasn’t really a point guard.

Loyer is also going to be very good and is further along in his development than players like Mathias and Cline at the same stage. Colvin has all the ability and just needs time. Jones is a great addition and provides the quickness that Purdue was missing last year. Morton has taken a lot of heat on this board this year, but is capable of backing up either guard position and provides nice depth. (I’ll leave Heide and Waddell out of the conversation because I don’t see them playing the 1 or 2).

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

Those football teams have made head coaching changes.

They have continued to be successful with new coaches because Michigan and Ohio state have been and are an attractive place to coach and play at—they pump out pro players left and right.

We then always get to the question “who’s better than Painter?” And no one can answer that because no one knows and just say “anyone but Painter”. You need to understand, Purdue basketball is not exactly an attractive place to coach at or come play at—it’s getting better and more recognized (whether good or bad) because of Painter’s success. Purdue bball would not attract a Mark Few, Bill Self, Izzo, Cal, scheyer, H. Davis, Billy Donovan, Hurley—those type of coaches. So then you’re stuck with what northside said and trying to perfectly pick a coach that’s “on the rise” and you may have flash in the pan success like Mike Davis or you may see the floor of your program like hiring an “up and coming” Archie Miller. You could say Shaka Smart, but he had one run to the F4 and hasn’t come close to replicating that…it is seeming that he may this year—-kinda like painter. Or maybe Rick Barnes? He’s had some awful luck in the tourney too but his Tennessee squad looks good this year.

Maybe let’s say you get super lucky and you do get that coach that’s really good, but then they have to go out and convince recruits to still come to Purdue even though the new coach is unproven at Purdue. Maybe that new coach finally does make Purdue an attractive place to coach and play, but I’d be willing to bet it’d take quite some time to get to that point and those same posters saying “fire painter” would also grow impatient and say “fire the new coach” because it’s taking longer than you thought it would.

If you or any other poster could provide any type of list of who you think would be willing to coach and do better, then please provide one.

P.S. can’t believe I’m defending painter 😂

 

[BoilerDaddy]

Those football teams have made head coaching changes.

OSU and Michigan are going to dominate Midwest recruiting regardless of coach. They can afford to switch coaches without losing their position. Purdue basketball is a perennial Big Ten contender because of great coaching.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

I think that the backcourt talent is clearly trending in the right direction, regardless of what Harris decides.

I don’t think most Purdue fans appreciate what a great career Smith is going to have, not to mention how good he is right now. He is running the team like no Purdue point guard that I have ever seen. Under Painter, the closest I have seen is Lewis Jackson, whose game was far more limited, or Carsen Edwards, who wasn’t really a point guard.

Loyer is also going to be very good and is further along in his development than players like Mathias and Cline at the same stage. Colvin has all the ability and just needs time. Jones is a great addition and provides the quickness that Purdue was missing last year. Morton has taken a lot of heat on this board this year, but is capable of backing up either guard position and provides nice depth. (I’ll leave Heide and Waddell out of the conversation because I don’t see them playing the 1 or 2).

well said

 

[bonefish1]

I don't necessarily disagree with some of your points about our back court talent but the whole moving on from Painter is kind of ridiculous.

If Painter didn't have such close ties to Purdue, a much bigger concern would be Painter moving on from us! We've been rated #1 at some point the last two years, we're rated in the top 3 this year and have some nice talent coming in next year but somehow "we could do better".

What makes Purdue basketball so special? We don't have a history of drawing in big time recruits. As many like to point out we haven't been to a FF in 40+ years. Before Painter got hired, we hadn't won a B1G Championship in 10 years. We don't have a legacy of NBA talent. So, what's the draw?

Purdue is currently the equivalent of Ohio State or Michigan in football or at the very least Penn State. I'm sure there are fans at those schools who think they deserve more but the other 11 or 12 B1G schools could only dream of competing at that level.

Again, back to my original question. What makes Purdue basketball so special?

I'll give you a clue. His initials are MP.

How long have you been following Purdue basketball?

 

[bonefish1]

What coaches consistently beat higher ranked teams in the tournament? I agree that Painter has not shown to be a great NCAAT coach to date but your data points could just as easily be deemed to be unlucky as representative of any type of causal relationship.

BTW, in no world does three data points (no clue where you get 4) represent any type of statistical trend.

The coaches that consistently have success in March. To get to the E8 or FF, you usually have to beat some really good teams that happen to be higher ranked. You might need to beat a 1 or 2 seed.
Painter's never done that (maybe Tenn was a 2?) .

And this whole notion of luck playing such a prominent factor: Honest question, do you think Purdue is the unluckiest team in the country when March comes?

 

[bonefish1]

Painter will be Purdue’s coach until he decides to quit, or God forbid, something happens. He is a Purdue guy through and through, and widely recognized by experts in the field as one of the best coaches in the game. Your continued posting about how bad he is, and how we should replace him, is mostly just trolling folks on here. If this is your idea of positive social interaction, you’ve got far bigger problems.

I said he's bad in the tourney, he's very good in the regular season.
Would I get excited for a replacement? Sure, but I'm resigned to the fact that he'll leave on his terms.
Maybe this is the year he wins the NC?

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

I said he's bad in the tourney, he's very good in the regular season.
Would I get excited for a replacement? Sure, but I'm resigned to the fact that he'll leave on his terms.
Maybe this is the year he wins the NC?

So you’ll just continue to say he’s good in the regular season but bad in March? ….something that we all know?

 

[bonefish1]

They have continued to be successful with new coaches because Michigan and Ohio state have been and are an attractive place to coach and play at—they pump out pro players left and right.

We then always get to the question “who’s better than Painter?” And no one can answer that because no one knows and just say “anyone but Painter”. You need to understand, Purdue basketball is not exactly an attractive place to coach at or come play at—it’s getting better and more recognized (whether good or bad) because of Painter’s success. Purdue bball would not attract a Mark Few, Bill Self, Izzo, Cal, scheyer, H. Davis, Billy Donovan, Hurley—those type of coaches. So then you’re stuck with what northside said and trying to perfectly pick a coach that’s “on the rise” and you may have flash in the pan success like Mike Davis or you may see the floor of your program like hiring an “up and coming” Archie Miller. You could say Shaka Smart, but he had one run to the F4 and hasn’t come close to replicating that…it is seeming that he may this year—-kinda like painter. Or maybe Rick Barnes? He’s had some awful luck in the tourney too but his Tennessee squad looks good this year.

Maybe let’s say you get super lucky and you do get that coach that’s really good, but then they have to go out and convince recruits to still come to Purdue even though the new coach is unproven at Purdue. Maybe that new coach finally does make Purdue an attractive place to coach and play, but I’d be willing to bet it’d take quite some time to get to that point and those same posters saying “fire painter” would also grow impatient and say “fire the new coach” because it’s taking longer than you thought it would.

If you or any other poster could provide any type of list of who you think would be willing to coach and do better, then please provide one.

P.S. can’t believe I’m defending painter 😂

What makes Purdue not an attractive place to play or coach?

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

What makes Purdue not an attractive place to play or coach?

What makes it an attractive place to play or coach?

 

[bonefish1]

What makes it an attractive place to play or coach?

Answer the question. You said it wasn't attractive. I'm curious to hear why that is.

 

[SCBoiler1]

How long have you been following Purdue basketball?

Approximately 50 Years.

 

[SCBoiler1]

What makes Purdue not an attractive place to play or coach?

Matt Painter, the team environment he's help create, Mackey Arena and the Fans. Doesn't hurt to be from a basketball state, but that doesn't seem to help IU

 

[Heads up BOILER]

Matt Painter, the team environment he's help create, Mackey Arena and the Fans. Doesn't hurt to be from a basketball state, but that doesn't seem to help IU

Mackey and the fan base make it unattractive? Being from IN a state that loves and follows basketball is unattractive as well

 

[northside100]

The coaches that consistently have success in March.

That's not an answer. Who are those coaches from your perspective? Every time Duke won a NC Duke was a 1 seed (4x) or a 2 seed (1x). Out of Coach K's final fours, he was worse than a 2 seed once (3 seed in 1990).

According to your argument, is Coach K an NCAAT disappointment for not pulling any upsets on the way to a NC?

 

[bonefish1]

That's not an answer. Who are those coaches from your perspective? Every time Duke won a NC Duke was a 1 seed (4x) or a 2 seed (1x). Out of Coach K's final fours, he was worse than a 2 seed once (3 seed in 1990).

According to your argument, is Coach K an NCAAT disappointment for not pulling any upsets on the way to a NC?

Coach K and Painter aren't in the same ball park. Bad comparison.
But, since you dug it up, I'd be interested to know how many #1 or 2 seeds coach K has beat.

 

[bonefish1]

Matt Painter, the team environment he's help create, Mackey Arena and the Fans. Doesn't hurt to be from a basketball state, but that doesn't seem to help IU

I think you misunderstood the question.

 

[northside100]

Coach K and Painter aren't in the same ball park. Bad comparison.
But, since you dug it up, I'd be interested to know how many #1 or 2 seeds coach K has beat.

Dodging the point again. Either you measure coaches based on their ability to beat higher seeds or you don't. Which is it?

 

[bonefish1]

Dodging the point again. Either you measure coaches based on their ability to beat higher seeds or you don't. Which is it?

again, you don't compare Painter with the greatest NCAA tourney coach of all time. He's not in the same league.
Maybe a better comparison would be Drew at Baylor.

 

[Wolegib]

I have followed purdue basketball since the Fred Schauss years. I liked Lee Rose. I wasn’t a huge fan of the Keady hire or the Painter hire. But in looking back I don’t remember any big name coaches ever campaigning or wanting to be the Purdue coach. At the same time when Purdue hired rose Keady and painter, I don’t recall. Purdue aggressively trying to hire any big name coach either. Purdue never tried to hire McGuire or self or Williams or Pitino or Calipari or geno. Or the guy at butler or smart or Huggins or anybody. Purdue was content in hiring a lesser known coach like Keady and Painter. Has that changed? I doubt it. has any big name coach ever expressed any interest in wanting to coach Purdue? Nope! It’s the same with the players painter recruits. The vast majority of top 50 recruits avoid Purdue like the plague! Is it because Purdue and west Lafayette are such an unattractive place? Or is it because of painter? Painter does an awesome job with the talent he attracted to play for Purdue. But he’s not about to change his style of basketball any time soon. And he only recruits players that match and fit that style. Could a different coach be able to lure better players to Purdue like Howard tried to do at Michigan? I highly doubt it. Replacing painter is not going to lure any top player to come to Purdue! I’m sorry, Purdue is a boring place. And it’s academic programs are not tailored to attracting elite basketball players. Face it the only reason Purdue gets as good of a player as they do is because of painter. No one and done player is attracted to play basketball at Purdue because they want to take thermo dynamics.

Painter may or may not ever make it to the final four. I hope he does. But I can’t see any other coach doing any better. I also can’t see any other coach even being interested at coming to Purdue. And I hate to say it but I don’t see the Purdue administration being very interested in replacing painter.

The best description of painter is that he is a cash cow! He’s not a risky growth stock! He’s better than the return you get on a savings bond but when you have a cash cow, there is no real desire or need to replace it.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

again, you don't compare Painter with the greatest NCAA tourney coach of all time. He's not in the same league.
Maybe a better comparison would be Drew at Baylor.

Somewhat of an answer….So you’d rather have Scott Drew than Painter? You think Scott Drew would jump at the opportunity to coach at Purdue?

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

I have followed purdue basketball since the Fred Schauss years. I liked Lee Rose. I wasn’t a huge fan of the Keady hire or the Painter hire. But in looking back I don’t remember any big name coaches ever campaigning or wanting to be the Purdue coach. At the same time when Purdue hired rose Keady and painter, I don’t recall. Purdue aggressively trying to hire any big name coach either. Purdue never tried to hire McGuire or self or Williams or Pitino or Calipari or geno. Or the guy at butler or smart or Huggins or anybody. Purdue was content in hiring a lesser known coach like Keady and Painter. Has that changed? I doubt it. has any big name coach ever expressed any interest in wanting to coach Purdue? Nope! It’s the same with the players painter recruits. The vast majority of top 50 recruits avoid Purdue like the plague! Is it because Purdue and west Lafayette are such an unattractive place? Or is it because of painter? Painter does an awesome job with the talent he attracted to play for Purdue. But he’s not about to change his style of basketball any time soon. And he only recruits players that match and fit that style. Could a different coach be able to lure better players to Purdue like Howard tried to do at Michigan? I highly doubt it. Replacing painter is not going to lure any top player to come to Purdue! I’m sorry, Purdue is a boring place. And it’s academic programs are not tailored to attracting elite basketball players. Face it the only reason Purdue gets as good of a player as they do is because of painter. No one and done player is attracted to play basketball at Purdue because they want to take thermo dynamics.

Painter may or may not ever make it to the final four. I hope he does. But I can’t see any other coach doing any better. I also can’t see any other coach even being interested at coming to Purdue. And I hate to say it but I don’t see the Purdue administration being very interested in replacing painter.

The best description of painter is that he is a cash cow! He’s not a risky growth stock! He’s better than the return you get on a savings bond but when you have a cash cow, there is no real desire or need to replace it.

Please provide a list of 3 potential candidates that would replace Painter, recruit the same, keep us in top 10 rankings contention , top of B1G and get us to S16 4 out of 6 years without having a down year in the transition.

 

[Gemini95]

I have followed purdue basketball since the Fred Schauss years. I liked Lee Rose. I wasn’t a huge fan of the Keady hire or the Painter hire. But in looking back I don’t remember any big name coaches ever campaigning or wanting to be the Purdue coach. At the same time when Purdue hired rose Keady and painter, I don’t recall. Purdue aggressively trying to hire any big name coach either. Purdue never tried to hire McGuire or self or Williams or Pitino or Calipari or geno. Or the guy at butler or smart or Huggins or anybody. Purdue was content in hiring a lesser known coach like Keady and Painter. Has that changed? I doubt it. has any big name coach ever expressed any interest in wanting to coach Purdue? Nope!

Other than a coach going back to his alma mater like a Roy Williams, has any coach ever expressed any interest in wanting to coach ANY other school? Our job has been open once in 40 years. When the hell would coaches just randomly start talking about wanting to coach here? Can you find me a quote of a big name coach expressing interest in any other job, let alone an un-vacant one?

 

[bonefish1]

Somewhat of an answer….So you’d rather have Scott Drew than Painter? You think Scott Drew would jump at the opportunity to coach at Purdue?

Are you serious? Would I rather have Scott Drew and his national championship? What do you think.

Do I think Drew would come coach Purdue? I don't know. I haven't spoken to him or his agent (and neither have you).

I'm guessing the people around the Texas Tech program never thought they could get Bob Knight.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Coach K and Painter aren't in the same ball park. Bad comparison.
But, since you dug it up, I'd be interested to know how many #1 or 2 seeds coach K has beat.

Surely Bill Self and Roy Williams pulled tons of big upsets in the NCAA… right ?

 

[bonefish1]

Please provide a list of 3 potential candidates that would replace Painter, recruit the same, keep us in top 10 rankings contention , top of B1G and get us to S16 4 out of 6 years without having a down year in the transition.

We've already done this exercise. Where were you?
A list gets provided and then you'll get bent out of shape and scream "Coach so-n-so would never come to Purdue!"

 

[bonefish1]

I have followed purdue basketball since the Fred Schauss years. I liked Lee Rose. I wasn’t a huge fan of the Keady hire or the Painter hire. But in looking back I don’t remember any big name coaches ever campaigning or wanting to be the Purdue coach. At the same time when Purdue hired rose Keady and painter, I don’t recall. Purdue aggressively trying to hire any big name coach either. Purdue never tried to hire McGuire or self or Williams or Pitino or Calipari or geno. Or the guy at butler or smart or Huggins or anybody. Purdue was content in hiring a lesser known coach like Keady and Painter. Has that changed? I doubt it. has any big name coach ever expressed any interest in wanting to coach Purdue? Nope! It’s the same with the players painter recruits. The vast majority of top 50 recruits avoid Purdue like the plague! Is it because Purdue and west Lafayette are such an unattractive place? Or is it because of painter? Painter does an awesome job with the talent he attracted to play for Purdue. But he’s not about to change his style of basketball any time soon. And he only recruits players that match and fit that style. Could a different coach be able to lure better players to Purdue like Howard tried to do at Michigan? I highly doubt it. Replacing painter is not going to lure any top player to come to Purdue! I’m sorry, Purdue is a boring place. And it’s academic programs are not tailored to attracting elite basketball players. Face it the only reason Purdue gets as good of a player as they do is because of painter. No one and done player is attracted to play basketball at Purdue because they want to take thermo dynamics.

Painter may or may not ever make it to the final four. I hope he does. But I can’t see any other coach doing any better. I also can’t see any other coach even being interested at coming to Purdue. And I hate to say it but I don’t see the Purdue administration being very interested in replacing painter.

The best description of painter is that he is a cash cow! He’s not a risky growth stock! He’s better than the return you get on a savings bond but when you have a cash cow, there is no real desire or need to replace it.

location, 'boredom' factor, etc.. none of that has anything to do with a recruits choice.

 

[bonefish1]

Surely Bill Self and Roy Williams pulled tons of big upsets in the NCAA… right ?

No, but they have a list of Final Fours and NCs they can point to.

 

[Gemini95]

Dodging the point again. Either you measure coaches based on their ability to beat higher seeds or you don't. Which is it?

You are being disingenuous or obtuse. That's like Bone saying some All star level NBA player is bad in the playoffs because he is 0-5 in game 7's and you come back with oh yeah well then Michael Jordan must have sucked because he never won a game 7. Yeah, he never had to. K didn't have to pull upsets because he rocketed straight to crazy success. He went to the FF in his 3rd NCAA appearance (6th year at Duke). That started a run of 7 FF and 2 NC in 9 years. There's no need to look at any other measure. Matt has none of that in 18 years. So what else can you look at? Does he over-, under- or properly achieve in March? Dont think anyone would say over. Some say proper bc his teams overachieve in the regular season and he makes enough SS and occasional EE. Others say underachieves bc lack of FF, and many more upset losses (some bad, some awful) than wins.

 

[Gemini95]

Comparing a guy with 0 FF's and 3 bad-to-historically-bad losses in a row to a bunch of dudes with natty's is really weird guys.

 

[SCBoiler1]

Mackey and the fan base make it unattractive? Being from IN a state that loves and follows basketball is unattractive as well

Misread your question. Listed the positives.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

We've already done this exercise. Where were you?
A list gets provided and then you'll get bent out of shape and scream "Coach so-n-so would never come to Purdue!"

Never seen one so I want to see who your list would be because I’d guarantee it’d take 5-7 years to be anywhere close to where we are as a program now and there’s no way you’d give that much time.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

Are you serious? Would I rather have Scott Drew and his national championship? What do you think.

Do I think Drew would come coach Purdue? I don't know. I haven't spoken to him or his agent (and neither have you).

I'm guessing the people around the Texas Tech program never thought they could get Bob Knight.

Question wasn’t to have his national championship. It was would do you think he/would actually want to come coach at Purdue right now?

 

[New Pal Boiler]

No, but they have a list of Final Fours and NCs they can point to.

But upsets are what really matter, right?

 

[New Pal Boiler]

We've already done this exercise. Where were you?
A list gets provided and then you'll get bent out of shape and scream "Coach so-n-so would never come to Purdue!"

And then I ask you where the ROI is on the $75 million the AD would spend to make this change and it’s crickets from you.