On a scale of 1 to 10, rate Purdue's play in conference
- Thread starter TC4THREE
- Start date
Relative to the rest of the conference, or relative to our expectations? I assumed the former and gave a 6.
Relative to your perception of our ability. Do you think we've played close to our capabilities or not?
Well, the best team we beat is perhaps a top 30-40 team who we beat without their best player at Mackey. That says a lot. The good news is that we still have IU, MSU and MD so we have some chances to get quality wins. I voted 4 as well, seems fair. We have a winning record but we haven't beat anyone of note and we lost one really bad game. Still time to turn it around but we need to improve a lot to hang with and beat the better teams.
I voted the same...6. Blown leads happen sometimes. It stinks when it happens, but Iowa is clearly the better team; they just might win the B1G this year. And if that's the case, it's hard to be upset about a loss yesterday. Purdue led at half, and had a rough few minutes to open the 2nd, and from there it snowballed before they regained composure and made a bit of a comeback.
But if people are getting all bent out of shape about losing on the home floor of (perhaps) eventual B1G champion, well, they might need to start setting your expectations with a little more rationale thinking about what is likely and what isn't. Purdue has 1 bad loss in the B1G, at Illinois. There are plenty of opportunities left to pick up road wins this season; it's not like they were going to win every road game anyway. Let's see how they do at Minnesota.
Last edited:
I voted below 5 because of how we've played and not just the results. Losing at Iowa yesterday was acceptable but our play in the 2nd half was not. I thought we played poorly most of the OSU game also even though we ended up winning by double digits on a late run.
Anywhere between 4-6 seems acceptable to me. This is a team with severe turnover problems, and we have no go-to player who can create his own, minus VE, which he seemed take things into his own hands yesterday, which is absolutely what we need. He is the best wing we have, and he needs to be the go-to. Without that, we have a very unselfish team, which is great, dominant bigs, again great, but when things go bad and we can't establish the post, we NEED someone to start creating things, otherwise we will be very inconsistent and lose games that pre-conference season many would think we would win.
We can beat UNC, Oklahoma, Kansas, Maryland, etc., but can also lose to Illinois and middling teams. A dominant stretch 4-5 will be the achilles of this team. We have nobody who can guard them without taking CS or Hammons out the game for long stretches.
We can beat UNC, Oklahoma, Kansas, Maryland, etc., but can also lose to Illinois and middling teams. A dominant stretch 4-5 will be the achilles of this team. We have nobody who can guard them without taking CS or Hammons out the game for long stretches.
I'm disappointed with our play. I really believe this team (10 deep) under someone like Coach K or Calipari would be undefeated right now. I feel Painter plays 10 guys regardless of the flow of the game or how we match up against others. If we have to play 7-8 players in a game because of the flow, then so be it. The other thought I have is if we do play all 10 guys, then let's play more up tempo. Because we have so many subs compared to other teams, let's pick up the pace and wear down the other teams. Our stand around the arc slow it down offense isn't that great when others sag down on the big guys and some of our guards can't hit squat from the arc.
PG play and perimeter shooting are as noticeably bad and most of us feared at the beginning of the season. I gave them a seven.
Let me understand something here... you are surely aware that neither Coach K or Cal have coached their own teams to an undefeated record, so I can only gather that you are saying you believe that the talent level at Purdue is so superior to that of UK or Duke, such that either of those coaches could have this team undefeated, but not their own teams?
Purdue has a solid - sometimes really good - player in Hammons on both ends of the floor. Biggie has a good deal of talent and - judging purely from body language - looks to be one of the few guys on the court for Purdue that truly believes in himself and his abilities and has any kind of winner's mentality. Purdue needs multiple guys like that at different positions. But he's still young and working the progression to the college game. Vince is probably the next best combination of skill and talent. The rest of the team is largely role players with specialty skills (Ray = defense, Cline = shooting, etc.). I don't say that as a putdown to them, I mean, I'm not the best all-around person in the world at my job either. I think it's just a reality though.
Relative to their power-5 peer group, Purdue has average to above-average guard play and good to "good+" post play (struggling for a word representing 'less than great' here). Looking at this team, I just don't know how anyone can reasonably suggest they should be undefeated with a better coach.
Last edited:
I agree with everything you said, but the guy who gave Purdue a 1 is alright? That is the only thing that bothers me. I know Purdue has been down since the Hummel days, and now that we finally have a legit squad, it seems people have unreal expectations. I gave us a 14-4 prediction in our conference record, and I thought I was being generous. I think a 12-6 or 13-5 is more realistic. Road wins without a solid shot-creator in the BT are very hard to come by
I don't know how anyone could rate our conf. performance thus far as average or above. We lost at home as an 8.5 point favorite to a team we led by 19 in the second half. We then lost on the road as a 12 point favorite to a below average B1G team. Yesterday's loss was generally expected. To me, an average rating (5 or 6) would mean we basically took care of business and won the games we should have won. So out of 8 conf. games, 6 went as expected and 2 were negative results. Below average. It would be interesting to run this again at the end of the regular season as we will have every opportunity to improve our profile.
PU lost one on the road they shouldn't have.......that is life in the Big Ten, it happens. The other two losses were to the #3 team in the country, where PU actually played well in one half of each. Obviously, PU isn't performing at a 10 level, but not at a 1 level either............I say somewhere in between
PU isn't performing at a 10 level, but not at a 1 level either............I say somewhere in between
Whoa! Slow down there and leave yourself some room for error.
Gave them a 7 based on what I now perceive the team to actually be, sadly not what I want them to be... shooting mediocrity with an inabilty to utilize size. If this actually is what the team is composed of, I am ok with their play, although this certainly wasn't the team that I thought they would be.
