Just for fun....had Painter used the portal..

[northside100]

it's a mute point, he wanted out of the BIG10

Moot 😉

Agree

 

[qazplm]

I think he got more from k state

Then whatever it would have taken. He fills the exact hole we have, another athletic big that can get rebounds, play inside or out, and let us play defensively against teams with multiple athletic big men.

Once we lost Jacobsen, we lost the ability to do that very well. Furst and Berg aren't the answer for that.

It's a moot point obviously, but he's just the type of player to fill that hole. I'm pretty sure Painter would have figured out a way to use a guy like that.

 

[qazplm]

Just add the athleticism on defense and maybe some scoring from the 4/5 spot. I’d say he’d be a nice fill in next to TKR. But I guess he wasn’t known as a dominant rebounder.

Exactly. His last year stats at Illinois were 12 pts, 37 percent from three, 6 boards a game, 3 assists. Is he a star? Of course not. Is that way better than what you are going to get from any healthy big on the current roster not named TKR right now? Absolutely.

Obviously I have no idea if he's have been a cultural fit. But assuming he would have, I don't see how this staff doesn't turn him into an upgrade over what we have healthy right now.

None of this is an attack on Painter. It's a hypothetical question of who would have helped IF we had used the portal. Obviously, we didn't use it and at the time, they hadn't changed the rules so we couldn't use it because we were capped. But yeah, he would have helped. I don't see how that's in question.

 

[boilerzz]

In the past, Painter has been very public about who he was recruiting in the portal or as a grad transfer.

We all knew Painter was recruiting the guard from Michigan who came to Purdue.

When Carsen Edwards came to Purdue, we all knew he was zpainter’s third choice and we knew who the other two were. When Edey came to Purdue, we all knew he was Psinter’s third choice and we knew who the other two were - Fickenson and the guy who went to Creighton.

When Jones came to Purdue, we all knew Painter was recruiting both players from SIU and the player who went to Illinois was actually Painter’s first choice of the two players.

All of this is factual in press conferences. Painter has never tried to hide who he was recruiting.

So to answer your question. Just ask what player who was in the portal was Painter actively recruiting last year? If you follow Purdue basketball, you would know Cox was another one of those players that was not on Painter’s original radar. Much like Carsen Edwards, painter was recruiting some one else . Painter was watching that other player, and saw that Cox outplayed him, so he signed Cox.

So Cox is basically the answer to your question. The player that Painter was recruiting at that game, went elsewhere . And Painter obviously liked Cox better than any portal player he was recruiting. Painter was looking at the portal for another shooting guard. And he choose Cox over who he was recruiting in the portal.

Wasn’t Painter also recruiting the player from Wisconsin that ended up going to Kansas? I believe if Painter really wanted him, Purdue could have found the NIL money he was asking for.

I’m beginning to believe Purdue basketball is a lot like Major League Baseball and free agents. The money is available, but Purdue doesn't want to pay a portal player more than their current starters receive. Purdue doesn’t overpay for anybody.

Dafuq?

 

[northside100]

Just add the athleticism on defense and maybe some scoring from the 4/5 spot. I’d say he’d be a nice fill in next to TKR. But I guess he wasn’t known as a dominant rebounder.

He’s never even been a good rebounder. Kid is 6’10, wants to be a guard and isn’t an efficient shooter or scorer. Doesn’t want t to get pay interior defense or rebound.

Probably a decent kid, has never learned how to play winning basketball.

 

[northside100]

Exactly. His last year stats at Illinois were 12 pts, 37 percent from three, 6 boards a game, 3 assists. Is he a star? Of course not. Is that way better than what you are going to get from any healthy big on the current roster not named TKR right now? Absolutely.

Obviously I have no idea if he's have been a cultural fit. But assuming he would have, I don't see how this staff doesn't turn him into an upgrade over what we have healthy right now.

None of this is an attack on Painter. It's a hypothetical question of who would have helped IF we had used the portal. Obviously, we didn't use it and at the time, they hadn't changed the rules so we couldn't use it because we were capped. But yeah, he would have helped. I don't see how that's in question.

Crazy to assume he would have been a cultural fit.

 

[northside100]

Then whatever it would have taken. He fills the exact hole we have, another athletic big that can get rebounds, play inside or out, and let us play defensively against teams with multiple athletic big men.

Once we lost Jacobsen, we lost the ability to do that very well. Furst and Berg aren't the answer for that.

It's a moot point obviously, but he's just the type of player to fill that hole. I'm pretty sure Painter would have figured out a way to use a guy like that.

Doesn’t rebound, doesn’t defend, doesn’t play physically. If you could take his physical attributes and turn him into a completely different player I agree.

 

[Bank Shot Podcast]

Who exactly has Carlyle guarded that he can “get at it defensively”? UNCG or maybe South Carolina? Maybe it was eastern Illinois or even the rally tough team of Marian?

And he IS a bad shooter. Was bad last year and has been BAD this year. He has not shown the ability to be able to take people off the bounce consistently or hit big shots in a game like Lance did.

But remember, you cherry picked ONE year where Lance shot 28% but he showed in others he was better than that and Carlyle. It’s ok to say Carlyle is not who you all thought he’d be…although we all saw it coming.

There is literally zero way to spin "28% is better than 32%." That is delusional. He's shot poorly so far this year but he's in a role completely different from last year at Stanford. And if you feel 32% is somehow horrible from 3 as a frosh, then I don't know what to tell you. I don't even understand how you can make the case "Lance showed he could be better in other years but no way Carlyle can after his freshman year."

As far as Carlyles defense, he isn't a bad defender. He's still learning without any doubt but he's not bad and he's quick. And him being a good enough defender has given Indiana a Top 30 defense at the moment.

 

[Bank Shot Podcast]

Maybe you should back off this Carlyle superman rant! This guy is shooting less than 30% from two and three. Defense??? Maybe if IU played somebody besides Pee-wee Herman and Mary had a little lamb, you could echo his defense, but he has shown practically nothing! Purdues freshman guards have been more productive than the over paid guard of IU! How much are you paying that dude?

At the moment he's about the same as Harris and Cox. Shoots a tiny bit worse from 3 than Cox by about a percent and shoots way better from 3 than Harris(who is at 21%). Slightly better PER right now and averaging a steal a game. I expect him to get better as he gets to play in his role more and he will have his moments here and there. But I'm not sure what I'm supposed to expect from the 4-5th scoring option? 15ppg?

 

[proudopete]

There is literally zero way to spin "28% is better than 32%." That is delusional. He's shot poorly so far this year but he's in a role completely different from last year at Stanford. And if you feel 32% is somehow horrible from 3 as a frosh, then I don't know what to tell you. I don't even understand how you can make the case "Lance showed he could be better in other years but no way Carlyle can after his freshman year."

As far as Carlyles defense, he isn't a bad defender. He's still learning without any doubt but he's not bad and he's quick. And him being a good enough defender has given Indiana a Top 30 defense at the moment.

A top 30 defense against the teams IU has played isn’t the brag you think it is. Probably more of an indictment.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

There is literally zero way to spin "28% is better than 32%." That is delusional. He's shot poorly so far this year but he's in a role completely different from last year at Stanford. And if you feel 32% is somehow horrible from 3 as a frosh, then I don't know what to tell you. I don't even understand how you can make the case "Lance showed he could be better in other years but no way Carlyle can after his freshman year."

As far as Carlyles defense, he isn't a bad defender. He's still learning without any doubt but he's not bad and he's quick. And him being a good enough defender has given Indiana a Top 30 defense at the moment.

Why did you pick that season and not the others where he shot better than that? Maybe Carlyle could have come here and been a better shooter because this staff has shown they can make guys better shooters. However, IU’s staff has not shown that at all. But he doesn’t fit for Purdue because he would have been maybe the 5th or 6th option and I don’t think he was going to play that role (in his eyes).

IU has a “top 30 defense” because they haven’t played anyone that is anywhere near good. Anyone Purdue has played would beat all of those teams, except maybe Marshall.

 

[DwaynePurvis00]

At the moment he's about the same as Harris and Cox. Shoots a tiny bit worse from 3 than Cox by about a percent and shoots way better from 3 than Harris(who is at 21%). Slightly better PER right now and averaging a steal a game. I expect him to get better as he gets to play in his role more and he will have his moments here and there. But I'm not sure what I'm supposed to expect from the 4-5th scoring option? 15ppg?

Those two are also freshman playing against competition that Carlyle has yet to play against in his career.

 

[BoilerDaddy]

There is a lot of value in not over paying for transfers. Use the money for retention. Shaka is doing the same at Marquette.

 

[Bank Shot Podcast]

Why did you pick that season and not the others where he shot better than that? Maybe Carlyle could have come here and been a better shooter because this staff has shown they can make guys better shooters. However, IU’s staff has not shown that at all. But he doesn’t fit for Purdue because he would have been maybe the 5th or 6th option and I don’t think he was going to play that role (in his eyes).

IU has a “top 30 defense” because they haven’t played anyone that is anywhere near good. Anyone Purdue has played would beat all of those teams, except maybe Marshall.

Because Painter clearly seen "he shot 28% last season and still took a flyer on him. You don't think he would take one on a freshman that shot 32%? You know Loyer shot 32% as a freshman too yea?

And Pom takes SOS into account when doing efficiency ratings. In case you didn't know. And IU is 26th for now. Purdue is 39th. As of now UCLA has the top defense at 12.

 

[Bank Shot Podcast]

Those two are also freshman playing against competition that Carlyle has yet to play against in his career.

"Has yet to play against in his career." His career high of 31 last year was against a good Washington State team and he had 28 against Arizona. Like I said, he's going to have his moments but he's adjusting to a completely different role compared to what he has a Stanford last year.