Hm, not quite. More like fouling intentionally and then putting in Grady to get the rebounds instead of wheeler or Williams.
Message for Coach Matt Painter
- Thread starter collegehoopsfan123
- Start date
Makes complete sense so long as you have the best guard in the country who comes through in the clutch. Ivey's struggles against St. Pete's had nothing to do with 'having to throw the ball inside'.
What was Haarms able to do on offense?
I really liked Matt but he never really became an offensive threat at Purdue. He was good at diving to the basket on pick and rolls but wasn't as good there as Zach and didn't draw near the attention as Zach on those plays. He was a good offensive rebounder but not nearly as good as Zach. I guess he did make 10 three pointers on the year on 31% shooting.
Matt was a good shot blocker but I don't believe he was ever named to the BT all defensive team as Zach was last year. Feels like you have this narrative and you're trying to recast history to fit your narrative in a way that doesn't make sense.
I'm all for a dominant center who is more mobile than Zach, but that basically limits your recruiting philosophy to 'sign a lottery pick'.
Purdue needs a roster filled with players
that can do multiple things on offense,
defense, and run the floor. When that day
comes, Purdue will be back in the Final Four
and winning a National Championship.
collegehoopsfan talks like he is chatgpt.
Lol, I was thinking the same thing. "collegehoopsfan123" is either a troll or an automated chatbot.
Or maybe a troll using a chatbot to do his dirty work?
You seem like you know every stat and history of Purdue, Im sure you can manage a google search.
I disagree 100% on that one. We had great shooters who weren’t scared to take the ahot and a guy who was a load on the inside. Yeah we had 2022 put to us on a platter and choked but I don’t think that one would have.
That's great to know. So all Purdue needs to do is recruit guys who can do multiple things on offense and defense and run the floor to get to a FF and and win a NC. That's fantastic.
We don't need any AA's, or even all conference guys. No five stars or lottery picks needed, just versatile players. Do I have that right?
Absolutely nothing in Painters tournament history would make anyone believe we were going to beat a long, athletic (sound familiar) TT team with or without Haas.
They would have double/tripled Haas, got the ball out of his hands, then played good perimeter D on our shooters. Haas wouldn't have been that big of a factor, just like we couldn't handle St Pete or FDU with a dominate big in the paint.
Yes, Matt was the starting center on a EE (nearly a FF) team. If you'd like to understand the difference between correlation and causation, here is an excellent, non-technical article. Really, it's worth a look. Link: Correlation vs Causation
Your narrative seems to be (you tell me) that the reason we made the EE and nearly the FF was because Matt was the a 'versatile' center. Is that right? My statement is that you're trying to support that view with erroneous information.
Matt hit 10 threes on the year on a below average shooting percentage and very, very rarely took or hit long twos. That's the only thing I can pick out in your answer that Matt did on offense that Zach doesn't do much better.
This is a good point. Edey started a high percentage of possessions setting ball screens on the perimeter and was effective in pick and roll offense. I think he only gets more effective with next season’s roster.
Teams put an incredible amount of resources and effort towards keeping Zach away from the basket on pick and rolls (including blatant holding / fouling), which opened things up for Braden and others. Agree that that should improve next year with an older Braden and Fletcher and the addition of Heide and Colvin.
2019 Villanova, 2019 Tennessee, 2022 Texas
Don't let facts get in the way of a determined narrative
Last edited:
FDU, St. Peters, Ark Little Rock, North Texas State.....
None of that makes what you said any less wrong.
Wow I regret momentarily taking you off of blocked. You stated 'Absolutely nothing in Painters tournament history would make anyone believe we were going to beat a long, athletic (sound familiar) TT team with or without Haas.'
Absolutely nothing! I gave you three examples of long, athletic teams that Purdue has beaten in the tournament in the last five years. Not sure how that qualifies as absolutely nothing.
If you are double/triple teaming haas you are leaving shooters open. Our shooters that year were draining their threes. Thats a win
42% from three as a team. Five guys shot 100 threes or more and the worst of them shot 39.6%. Mathias shot close to 47% for the year.
That team was loaded. A lot of people forget that they had Haarms, Eastern and Cline coming off the bench in addition to Edwards, Edwards, PJ, Mathias and Haas. Funny that some people who want to credit the EE run the next year to playing a mobile big forget that Haarms played nearly as much as Haas in 2017-2018 and Nojel was strong, uber athletic and shot 50% from the floor that year. They were playing as well as anyone in the country before Vince got sick and then hurt in February. If that doesn't happen they win 30 games heading into the NCAAT and are a 1 seed. Even with that they were starting to get back in stride before the Haas injury.
Oh no....please don't block me.
So, Purdue beat some teams they were favored over? Great, hang a banner.
But, what happens when they get beat by 16, 15, 14 and 12 seeds in the last 5 years?
Painter had a 7'4 NPOY going against literally, one of the smallest teams in D1, and he couldn't figure out a way to beat them.
Again, I ask, what would Painter have done when TT could get out and cover our shooters? And if our shooters had an off night, then what? Painter has shown no ability to make, or even be willing to make adjustments. He's easy to prepare for an coach against.
That team had the same shooters that rained on Nova and Tennessee the next year, plus Dakota and Vince.
Exactly.
Pretty big swing to go from arguing that 'nothing in Painter's history suggests that he could have beat TT with Haas' to 'oh yeah, well what if the team that shoots 42% from three and has five shooters that hit at 40% or better on 100 or more three attempts has everyone get cold against TT?'
Could and would are very different. Big ask for anyone to get past Villanova that year.
He doesn't get past someone every year.
This is going to sound immediately troll-y, but I promise you it's not.
I hear this complaint made again and again, but I have yet to really have someone explain why a system that can win upwards of 30 games in a season cannot win 4 to 5 games in the tournament.
I know that people immediately point to Painter and say his "system" doesn't work because it hasn't worked.
But that is not an explanation. Just because it hasn't, doesn't mean it can't.
Iowa got the 1979 bid over us because they swept us. The Iowa game was the second worst game I've ever seen in Mackey. Losing to Stetson would be #1.
My worst Purdue game at Mackey was a Sunday afternoon snoozer loss to Northwestern at the end of the 2013-14 season.
They go to cover threes, you dump it down low and Haas was going to beat a 1-1 matchup. That team didnt have off nights. Painter tried to do the same thing last year but no obe could shoot. They go 25% from 3 and they win the game. Did he adjust great in game, no. But I have watched painter adapt our style for specific teams year after year. In game, maybe, but to say he is going to lose no matter what? That is a stretch. Aj hammons, were we crying about clogging the lane? Jj were we clogging lane? Do we always play this way? No. When you have a giant big who can draw a triple team, you shoot from outside and get rid of the triple team. We didnt hit shots plain and simple. Now in game when not shooting well do we need you on the bench in painters ear to say “adjust” every time he says “move”. Probably so. But man, we were right there ready to win in the tournament twice and injuries killed us. Saying those teams couldn’t win is just not right.
I agree with you on this one. Painter's plan this year would have worked except we didn't have the three point shooters. The only question would be whether Painter could have anticipated that this would be an issue. Purdue really didn't have a bunch of proven three point shooters on the roster this year. If you go back to the Hass years we had V. Edwards, Mathias, CE, Cline and PJ. All those guys shot 40% + from 3. We didn't have anyone shoot 40% from 3 this year and only had 2 guys shoot over 35%.
In hindsight, should Painter have anticipate that he didn't have the shooters capable of playing the inside out game? Maybe he knew it but still thought it gave us the best chance to win. It worked out during the regular season, but in the tournament its hard to shoot better than your average (no matter how low it is) 6 games in a row.
Other than Loyer improving, can we realistically expect any better shooting next season?
Lots of woulda-shoulda-coulda.
Tell me this;
Which teams are you betting more on:
A) A healthy Haas team against a long, quick, athletic TT team
B) A team with a Top 5 lottery pick, a close-to NBA caliber center and a future NPOY and a team ranked No1 during the year against a cindarella 15 seed
or
C) A No.1 seed, a team that spent a lot of time ranked No.1, with the 7'4, NPOY/Naismith winner against a 16 seed that shouldn't have even been in the tourney and was literally the smallest team in the tourny.
So, I ask again......if Painter couldn't win with teams B and C, what makes you think he's going to win with team A against a much, much better opponent? With or without Haas, we're losing that TT game.
The simple explanation:
Painter's teams are built to win ugly B10 rock fights by running the offense through the low post and surrounding that post scorer with shooters who aren't particularly athletic or have the ability to create their own shot.
In the tourney, when a team can neutralize the low post scorer and force the ball back out on the perimeter, your one dimensional players better be able to make shots. Ours aren't.
On D, those other teams with good athletes and ball handlers just attack our slower guys off the dribble and once that happens, our D is in scramble mode.
Again....if Painter couldn't beat a 15 seed with a Top 5 lottery pick and a very small, barely D1 16 seed with the 7'4 NPOY, what gives you any shread of confidence that he was going to beat a good, long, athletic TT team? Haas was even slower and less offensively skilled than Edey. He wouldn't have made that much of a difference against TT.
Your comparison is full of flaws and lacks logic. It is a bit of an emotional rant. If our freshman guards would have shot as well as they did earlier in the year, our bench would have finished that last game. Painters plan was solid. Our boys just didn’t execute.
Similar threads
