ON Purdue BBall recruiting

[TJBoiler]

I had JMV on here in Indianapolis. He was interviewing Dane Fife who is now MSU assistant coach. They were discussing Izzo and recruiting.

JMV asked Fife about how does a coach recruiting a player know the player is REALLY interested in the school. Rather then just being polite etc... Fife said MSU wants certain players and tells players Izzo wants tough players that fits into the program.

Fife then brought up Matt Painter as an example. Fife said Matt tells recruits that they will have to be tough and have to play physical hard nosed defense to start and play at Purdue. I understand defense wins but #1 to recruit 5 star recruits Purdue is already at a disadvantage versus say a Duke or Kentucky. That's Matt's selling point? No wonder he struggles to get top recruits.

I like Matt Painter personally and don't think he is a bad coach. However his offensive style seems to hurt recruiting. Remember the baby Boilers? That year they lacked a legit big man as JJ was still struggling to play at the Big 10 level. Yet that team was fun to watch and one of best outside shooting teams in the country. Sooo is it just not having the players? Watching the NCAA games it was a joke how poor Purdue shot the 3 this year. Maybe just youth as the best 3 pt shooters were all frosh or soph's.

Purdue will never be a Kansas or a North Carolina but if you play a certain style of Basketball you can land potential good recruits.

 

[Cleanface]

Aren't you a Notre Dame fan too??

RJBoiler??

 

[purdue4sure]

Wisconsin. Butler. Their "style" of play is not much different than Purdue's. MSU is also known for D rather than O. Izzo's message doesn't sound very different than Painter's.

But as pointed out, thekey is to get players that fit the program.

 

[burbo]

But doesn't recruiting Stephens, Mathias, and Cline prove that he's recruiting more to the offense side of the game? Those guys are developing nicely on the defensive side as well, but none of them were known got their defensive prowess that I recall.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[purdue4sure]

Originally posted by burbo:
But doesn't recruiting Stephens, Mathias, and Cline prove that he's recruiting more to the offense side of the game? Those guys are developing nicely on the defensive side as well, but none of them were known got their defensive prowess that I recall.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

True. Probably the only current player who was known for D over O was Hammons.

 

[icewind7]

I understand what you meant here. There's the difference between a good recruiter and average recruiter. You emphasize what you recruit wants to hear, not what you want to say. It doesn't mean you have to lie.

 

[vilehoopster]

"It doesn't mean you have to lie." ...... isn't a lie of omission still a lie.

I understand your point, but Painter has to be honest and recruit players that fit his program. We say what happened when players were unhappy at Purdue.

 

[icewind7]

Actually, no.

You want to deliver 5 messages, A, B, C, D, and E. Every recruit has difference need, I am sure. You feel C is important for recruiting that particular person, so you put that on high priority. You still deliver A, B, D, and E with lower priority.

 

[Bruce1]

Anybody in Sales will tell you that you need to KNOW the customer and give him the info he needs. That is not lying to emphasize what the recruit wants. I mean it's a given that all of the really top teams play great defense. It seems to me that Biggie does not want to be stuck at the 5. We are the only one's who can say emphatically that he will always be a 4. Does that mean he will Never be at the 5 for us? Hell no? We need to match up and/or exploit our strengths. It is not a black and white world. Painter needs to learn how to recruit. Last Winter in an interview said his assistants were on him about not turning off recruits. I hope he is listening.

Also, is it possible to over recruit a player? It seems to me that if every time a player looks up Painter is there could, over time, come across like he is begging the guy to come. Just wondering.

 

[woggy718]

"To thy known self be true"

I'd rather Painter be up front with players and get kids that want to be at Purdue and play Purdues style than blow a bunch of smoke up a players ass just to get him here. It's not about getting the best players, it's a our getting the right players. Wisconsin proved that yet again last night.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[icewind7]

10 years of result speaks. That's why we are still here arguing about this.

 

[lbodel]

There's also reality that very few programs recruit to the level of Michigan State.

If it was that simple, everyone would do it!

 

[BoilerFan#35]

So are you saying Creamy makes the best pitches? Come over here shoot all you want and who needs defense.

 

[icewind7]

I have to disagree, as I said the same thing several years ago. Even noname schools can recruit these players, why cannot we? Were these school cheating too?

if you look at rival150 for 2014,

#2 go to SMU
#8 and #15 go to UNLV
#16 go to Seton Hall

if you look at rival150 for 2013,

#15 go to Arkansas
#18 go to SMU

if you look at rival2150 for 2012,

#4 go to Baylor
#6 and #16 go to Providence
#7 go to UNLV
#10 go to Okla st
#20 go to Houston
#21 go to San Diego St

 

[Bigohh]

Re: ON Purdue BBall recruiting exactly seems like....

basically the same message. I assume the only difference is the $$$ that are thrown in.

 

[lbodel]

These are not black and white situations.

Of course there are some schools that pick off players, usually there's a reason. Half of recruiting is luck. Look at Glenn Robinson III - the kid didn't want to come to Purdue, period. That sucks for us because it obviously worked out well for someone like Kendall Stephens - who did grow up a Purdue fan and wanted to play at Purdue. When Wisconsin offered Sam Dekker, his best other offer was from Southern Illinois? He committed 24 hours after Wisconsin offered him. And a year later he had blossomed into a 5 star recruit. Bo Ryan didn't have to flipping compete with anybody for a 5 star - simply fell into his lap.

Other people you just don't want to touch. You mentioned Isaiah Whitehead and Seton Hall getting a 5 star - well, the guy was at the center of an epic collapse by Seton Hall - with public jabs at each other and all sorts of team drama. No thank you.

Why don't you tally up how many 5 star players go to the Big Ten?

2014: 3 (Blackmon, Russell, Lyle)

2013: 2 (Vonleh being one)

2012: 4 (Yogi being one)

2011: 2 (Zeller being one).

So in the last 4 years, the Big Ten has gotten 11 five star recruits. 4 of the 11 went to IU (we know how well those worked out).

To act like all of these Big Ten schools get 5 star recruits on the regular is incredibly misleading. These 11 went to a total of 5 different schools. IU had the most with Ohio State/Michigan State being the others that had more than 1. 2 schools had 1.

9 had zero.

Look, I am not someone who gets fired up over last place recruiting classes ala our football team. But if there's ONE thing the previous couple years could have taught you is that there is more than just talent when it comes to creating a good basketball team. And it's not like we do NOT have talent. We have more 4 stars on our team than we did with the "Baby Boilers", but the difference is the team was already established when they stepped on campus (we went to the NCAA Tourney the year before).

It baffles me that people on the basketball forum expect Purdue to be getting 5 star recruits, then you go over to the football forum and it's a celebration for a 2 star recruit and "we really like" our last place recruiting class. We do NOT need to have Michigan State/Ohio State recruiting classes, and it's probably not realistic quite yet to expect them. And it's the same damn reason we don't need Ohio State/Penn State football recruiting classes. But the difference between our football and basketball recruiting is significant - and the results show. It's just like how Wisconsin doesn't have the same talent as Kentucky. Ohio State had more talent on their team than we did, yet we had just as good of a year as they did.

We don't NEED the same talent level because Matt Painter has shown he can get more out of his players and can strategize as good as any other coach can. It's not to say we should never to get 5 stars - Painter has shown that he will go after some of them hard. But this notion that wow, we can't recruit if we can't land 1 guy or we'll never be good without a 5 star player is a bunch of bologna.

 

[Inspector100]

Originally posted by lbodel:
These are not black and white situations.

Of course there are some schools that pick off players, usually there's a reason. Half of recruiting is luck. Look at Glenn Robinson III - the kid didn't want to come to Purdue, period. That sucks for us because it obviously worked out well for someone like Kendall Stephens - who did grow up a Purdue fan and wanted to play at Purdue. When Wisconsin offered Sam Dekker, his best other offer was from Southern Illinois? He committed 24 hours after Wisconsin offered him. And a year later he had blossomed into a 5 star recruit. Bo Ryan didn't have to flipping compete with anybody for a 5 star - simply fell into his lap.

Other people you just don't want to touch. You mentioned Isaiah Whitehead and Seton Hall getting a 5 star - well, the guy was at the center of an epic collapse by Seton Hall - with public jabs at each other and all sorts of team drama. No thank you.

Why don't you tally up how many 5 star players go to the Big Ten?

2014: 3 (Blackmon, Russell, Lyle)

2013: 2 (Vonleh being one)

2012: 4 (Yogi being one)

2011: 2 (Zeller being one).

So in the last 4 years, the Big Ten has gotten 11 five star recruits. 4 of the 11 went to IU (we know how well those worked out).

To act like all of these Big Ten schools get 5 star recruits on the regular is incredibly misleading. These 11 went to a total of 5 different schools. IU had the most with Ohio State/Michigan State being the others that had more than 1. 2 schools had 1.

9 had zero.

Look, I am not someone who gets fired up over last place recruiting classes ala our football team. But if there's ONE thing the previous couple years could have taught you is that there is more than just talent when it comes to creating a good basketball team. And it's not like we do NOT have talent. We have more 4 stars on our team than we did with the "Baby Boilers", but the difference is the team was already established when they stepped on campus (we went to the NCAA Tourney the year before).

It baffles me that people on the basketball forum expect Purdue to be getting 5 star recruits, then you go over to the football forum and it's a celebration for a 2 star recruit and "we really like" our last place recruiting class. We do NOT need to have Michigan State/Ohio State recruiting classes, and it's probably not realistic quite yet to expect them. And it's the same damn reason we don't need Ohio State/Penn State football recruiting classes. But the difference between our football and basketball recruiting is significant - and the results show. It's just like how Wisconsin doesn't have the same talent as Kentucky. Ohio State had more talent on their team than we did, yet we had just as good of a year as they did.

We don't NEED the same talent level because Matt Painter has shown he can get more out of his players and can strategize as good as any other coach can. It's not to say we should never to get 5 stars - Painter has shown that he will go after some of them hard. But this notion that wow, we can't recruit if we can't land 1 guy or we'll never be good without a 5 star player is a bunch of bologna.

+1

 

[BoilerDeac]

I kind of agree with the OP. It's sad, but most recruits probably don't want to hear all about defense. Painter needs to become a better salesman.

 

[cprh9u]

Originally posted by lbodel:


We don't NEED the same talent level because Matt Painter has shown he can get more out of his players and can strategize as good as any other coach can.

Huh? The 2007 class, full of talent, delivered us 1 co-B1G championship and 2 sweet 16's. Other than that we've gotten very little. I think this past year is Painters best without Robbie, JJ or Moore. This statement is just incredibly false.

 

[Inspector100]

Originally posted by TJBoiler:.............

Fife then brought up Matt Painter as an example. Fife said Matt tells recruits that they will have to be tough and have to play physical hard nosed defense to start and play at Purdue. I understand defense wins but #1 to recruit 5 star recruits Purdue is already at a disadvantage versus say a Duke or Kentucky. That's Matt's selling point? No wonder he struggles to get top recruits.

..........

OK, TJB let's get into the paragraph you posted that is shown above. I want to you to think about this real hard. Did Fife actually say Painter tells recruits certain things? Couple things here. I think Fife has more class than to use another conference coach as an example and say he "knows" what they tell recruits. Fife should be all about MSU and be a salesman for the program he is part of. This is a great opportunity for him to really lay on the sauce. Talking about other programs and coaches in that way doesn't benefit from that opportunity. So, I don't believe you here.

I see from your additional statements that you do NOT like Coach Painter. You don't know the things Coach Painter tell a recruit anymore than Coach Fife. You can dislike him if you want and you also don't have to root for the Purdue Boilermakers. Just don't say this stuff till you actually know and can prove it.

If I am wrong, sorry, but that is my take on your point and expression.

 

[TwinDegrees2]

Originally posted by icewind7:
10 years of result speaks. That's why we are still here arguing about this.

As they are arguing on Catpause, on Peeg's, and on many other boards. It's where the fan base is, or believes they are, smarter than the coach. 30% of the posters on here would be undefeated with the current PU squad. TIC

 

[BoilerBF]

"Painter needs to learn how to recruit"

Hammons
Haas
Edwards
Stephens
Ray Davis
Matthias
Smotherman
Cline

Now in contention for Swanigan.

Nothing wrong with recruiting now. It's about building a long term program that can win consistently. For years people said Bo Ryan can't win big in March because of "his system".....because he's not a good enough recruiter etc etc. Those people were wrong.

Painter's reputation as a straight shooter....helps him over time in recruiting. He's not worried about one sale....he's worried about the long term reputation of the program.

 

[BarringtonBoiler]

Same story, different year!

The more things change, the more they stay the same.....Ten years later and we are talking again about the same things. That says all we need to know. What is constant is Purdue and we accept and cherish being average.........

 

[icewind7]

My point is that I believe we can always improve in this area because Painter isn't getting 100% of the recruits that he wants. Let's discuss how to make it better instead of telling ourselves "we are doing fine right now, so just keep doing the same way for another 10 years"

 

[icewind7]

Long term you meant is that we wait until 2040? Wisconsin and Butler type of winning happens once in full moon.. Winning consistently are defined by Duke, Kentucky, Mich St, Ohio St.. those type of programs by the eyes of the nation.

 

[mathboy]

Originally posted by TJBoiler:
I had JMV on here in Indianapolis. He was interviewing Dane Fife who is now MSU assistant coach. They were discussing Izzo and recruiting.

JMV asked Fife about how does a coach recruiting a player know the player is REALLY interested in the school. Rather then just being polite etc... Fife said MSU wants certain players and tells players Izzo wants tough players that fits into the program.

Fife then brought up Matt Painter as an example. Fife said Matt tells recruits that they will have to be tough and have to play physical hard nosed defense to start and play at Purdue. I understand defense wins but #1 to recruit 5 star recruits Purdue is already at a disadvantage versus say a Duke or Kentucky. That's Matt's selling point? No wonder he struggles to get top recruits.

I like Matt Painter personally and don't think he is a bad coach. However his offensive style seems to hurt recruiting. Remember the baby Boilers? That year they lacked a legit big man as JJ was still struggling to play at the Big 10 level. Yet that team was fun to watch and one of best outside shooting teams in the country. Sooo is it just not having the players? Watching the NCAA games it was a joke how poor Purdue shot the 3 this year. Maybe just youth as the best 3 pt shooters were all frosh or soph's.

Purdue will never be a Kansas or a North Carolina but if you play a certain style of Basketball you can land potential good recruits.

Interesting perspective here. Hard to tell where the quotes from Fife stop and the opinion of the OP starts. That's okay, because there is a point to made in here.

Let's look at Duke. FIrst, MSU did not slip on banana peels trying to score against a very good Duke team. Duke plays hard nosed defense, just like Purdue. They are also highly skilled offensively, and they are experienced, two things Purdue did not have this year. I will bet dollars to donuts Coach K says the same things about defense that Painter does. You had better play it, or you will be collecting splinters. This is not a negative in recruiting. It is a requirement in recruiting. You have to get the kids with the right attitude.

I think 2 good things have happened to Purdue recruiting recently. First, it is now better funded than in past years. That alone will produce better results. Second, Painter has learned that all those stars mean crap. Some asshat scout saw a game where a kid was dominant. It might mean the kid is good, or it might be the kid is a bust. Trust to your own scouting and use your own criteria. Anyone who thinks Painter is doing things the same way for the past tem years is over simplifying and refusing to use their intelligence to observe.

We finished 4th, just a whisper out of third, losing out to an FF team this year, in a league that put two teams into the FF. We have a very young team overall. We started 2 freshmen, and a sophmore, with young kids coming off the bench. It took us half the season to figure out who we were. Imagine our record with a more experienced team that could start out hot - similar to the way Wisonsin played this year. Bottom line, our recruiting is doing fine.

Now, I am not predicting a FF run next year. There are too many variables to say. However, I do expect a stronger team, and I expect the 2 freshmen coming in to play significant minutes.

 

[cprh9u]

Originally posted by BoilerBF:

"Painter needs to learn how to recruit"

Hammons
Haas
Edwards
Stephens
Ray Davis
Matthias
Smotherman
Cline

Now in contention for Swanigan.

We've been in "contention" for a lot of really good players that we don't land, so I don't think that means much to anyone.

Of the players you listed as proving Painter knows how to recruit, the highest award I can think of is 2nd team all B1G by Hammons as a junior and honorable mention by Davis as a junior. None of these guys have proven to be dynamic players along the lines of JJ/Moore/Hummel or in more recent years Kaminsky/ Dekker/ Russell/ Okafor/ Harris/ Stauskas/ Burke/ Oladipo, etc. The players you list are mostly good, solid players who can help you win games, but we need some dynamic game changers to go along with them if we want to do more than an occasional sweet 16 run. Even the 2 sweet 16 runs in the Painter era were accompanied by 2 guys who were top 50 in Moore and JJ and another who played like it in Hummel.

Out of all of these players, maybe Edwards can reach that level and give us something special, but he needs some help. Who can Painter add that will not just fill a role, but will make a difference and get us over the top against really talented teams in March?

 

[Boiler Buck]

Originally posted by cprh9u:

Originally posted by BoilerBF:

"Painter needs to learn how to recruit"

Hammons
Haas
Edwards
Stephens
Ray Davis
Matthias
Smotherman
Cline

Now in contention for Swanigan.

We've been in "contention" for a lot of really good players that we don't land, so I don't think that means much to anyone.

Of the players you listed as proving Painter knows how to recruit, the highest award I can think of is 2nd team all B1G by Hammons as a junior and honorable mention by Davis as a junior. None of these guys have proven to be dynamic players along the lines of JJ/Moore/Hummel or in more recent years Kaminsky/ Dekker/ Russell/ Okafor/ Harris/ Stauskas/ Burke/ Oladipo, etc. The players you list are mostly good, solid players who can help you win games, but we need some dynamic game changers to go along with them if we want to do more than an occasional sweet 16 run. Even the 2 sweet 16 runs in the Painter era were accompanied by 2 guys who were top 50 in Moore and JJ and another who played like it in Hummel.

Out of all of these players, maybe Edwards can reach that level and give us something special, but he needs some help. Who can Painter add that will not just fill a role, but will make a difference and get us over the top against really talented teams in March?

I understand what you are saying and there is a lot of truth to it, but you gloss over some facts on your way to the point....
1. All B1G teams are in contention for a lot of good players. Even MSU.
2. Wasn't Davis B1G Defensive player of the year?
3. Hasn't Hammons been all B1G defensive first teamer the last two years.

But yes, you are correct, every team needs a dynamic player or two that fits their system. And that is what gets teams over the hump....so no arguments with you there. I believe Painter agrees with you, and that is why he is recruiting Biggie the hardest.

One of my issue's is with Painter has been - why he isn't on a "top 40" guy every year. He seems to be doing that now with Biggie this year, Nick Ward next and Scrugs, etc. after that....so with that, hopefully the law of averages works in his favor soon...

 

[lbodel]

Of course it can get better. But nobody gets 100% of the recruits they want. And if it was so flipping easy to be a Duke, UNC, etc. - more people would be doing it wouldn't you think?

 

[BoilerBF]

Haas - all freshman team
Davis - BTDPOY
AJH - 2nd team all big ten
VE - as you mention a high ceiling
KS - injured last year...but will be an elite 3 pt shooter over next 2 years

The careers of these players aren't over. There is good talent in the program right now...you just choose to assume this group won't accomplish anything of significance.

2009-2011 was a brutal recruiting period. The train has turned around and is going in a very positive direction now.

 

[Inspector100]

Originally posted by mathboy:

Originally posted by TJBoiler:
I had JMV on here in Indianapolis. He was interviewing Dane Fife who is now MSU assistant coach. They were discussing Izzo and recruiting.

JMV asked Fife about how does a coach recruiting a player know the player is REALLY interested in the school. Rather then just being polite etc... Fife said MSU wants certain players and tells players Izzo wants tough players that fits into the program.

Fife then brought up Matt Painter as an example. Fife said Matt tells recruits that they will have to be tough and have to play physical hard nosed defense to start and play at Purdue. I understand defense wins but #1 to recruit 5 star recruits Purdue is already at a disadvantage versus say a Duke or Kentucky. That's Matt's selling point? No wonder he struggles to get top recruits.

I like Matt Painter personally and don't think he is a bad coach. However his offensive style seems to hurt recruiting. Remember the baby Boilers? That year they lacked a legit big man as JJ was still struggling to play at the Big 10 level. Yet that team was fun to watch and one of best outside shooting teams in the country. Sooo is it just not having the players? Watching the NCAA games it was a joke how poor Purdue shot the 3 this year. Maybe just youth as the best 3 pt shooters were all frosh or soph's.

Purdue will never be a Kansas or a North Carolina but if you play a certain style of Basketball you can land potential good recruits.

Interesting perspective here. Hard to tell where the quotes from Fife stop and the opinion of the OP starts. That's okay, because there is a point to made in here.

Let's look at Duke. FIrst, MSU did not slip on banana peels trying to score against a very good Duke team. Duke plays hard nosed defense, just like Purdue. They are also highly skilled offensively, and they are experienced, two things Purdue did not have this year. I will bet dollars to donuts Coach K says the same things about defense that Painter does. You had better play it, or you will be collecting splinters. This is not a negative in recruiting. It is a requirement in recruiting. You have to get the kids with the right attitude.

I think 2 good things have happened to Purdue recruiting recently. First, it is now better funded than in past years. That alone will produce better results. Second, Painter has learned that all those stars mean crap. Some asshat scout saw a game where a kid was dominant. It might mean the kid is good, or it might be the kid is a bust. Trust to your own scouting and use your own criteria. Anyone who thinks Painter is doing things the same way for the past tem years is over simplifying and refusing to use their intelligence to observe.

We finished 4th, just a whisper out of third, losing out to an FF team this year, in a league that put two teams into the FF. We have a very young team overall. We started 2 freshmen, and a sophmore, with young kids coming off the bench. It took us half the season to figure out who we were. Imagine our record with a more experienced team that could start out hot - similar to the way Wisonsin played this year. Bottom line, our recruiting is doing fine.

Now, I am not predicting a FF run next year. There are too many variables to say. However, I do expect a stronger team, and I expect the 2 freshmen coming in to play significant minutes.

Concur. Good job, MB

 

[ustankass]

Cprh9u, honest question, and I guess to any other painter "dislikers" I know it's a big if, but what will you say if Swanigan commits? Will it then become "well so he got one, he needs to get more than that"? Or will you give credit where credit is due? I understand getting one recruit doesn't equal wins, but a huge critique of painter is his "inability" to land big time recruits and this would put a rest to it, for at least a little bit. It's easy to to complain when things are bad, but will you eat crow if that happens?
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[lbodel]

At the end of the day, life will go on if he doesn't commit (which DOES NOT seem likely).

Basketball recruiting is a fine art. It's a sport where you get an idea of a kid earlier on than in a sport like football. It's also a much more personal sport and requires relationships early on in many cases.

It's also NOT an easy thing to do. There's a reason you see a school hire an assistant coach who happens to be in with a recruit. You're not gonna see that happen a lot.

Painter has shown he is a no-BS guy, to steal a phrase from the team. He's not going to lie to these kids to get them to come here. Now when Fife says he doesn't sugar coat it, it's not like Painter is negative and not selling the program and doesn't make a recruit feel special. They have also very publicly sold Purdue as a place to come for big men.

That being said, as I said in another post, Purdue is a team that needs to compete with other teams in terms of talent. Purdue's probably not in the near future going to become a place that is landing five star recruits. And that's fine. We just need to be within an arm's reach of those teams, and Purdue is getting there.

In the "Baby Boilers" senior year, that team was literally cruising and I think had an extremely legit shot at a Final Four. It didn't have 5 star talent. It had 3 four star players basically. But the team functioned so well together and they had the right pieces assembled. It didn't have the depth though, and it showed when Hummel went out.

Look at Wisconsin - they don't have anywhere CLOSE the talent level of Kentucky. When Butler went to back to back Final Fours, they had nowhere near the amount of talent.

The one thing I really like about Purdue's current team is that it has depth. If Hammons comes back, you have a legit 2 deep at center. You have legit 2 deeps with Edwards/Smotherman. You have 2 deeps with Stephens/Mathias.

We have a lot of good players on our team right now. And would adding Swanigan be great? Sure. But it's probably not likely (particularly since we don't know if Hammons is coming back).

But even if he doesn't come here, this team has some pieces it didn't have a few years back with the Baby Boilers - depth. And it also is a team that is more spread out amongst age. While it was fun with the "Baby Boilers", having 3 players at three positions for 4 years (and for 35+ minutes a game) of starting is not only hard to recruit in when you can't really guarantee much playing time, it's also a lot to replace in one year.

 

[cprh9u]

Originally posted by Boiler Buck:

Originally posted by cprh9u:

Originally posted by BoilerBF:

"Painter needs to learn how to recruit"

Hammons
Haas
Edwards
Stephens
Ray Davis
Matthias
Smotherman
Cline

Now in contention for Swanigan.

We've been in "contention" for a lot of really good players that we don't land, so I don't think that means much to anyone.

Of the players you listed as proving Painter knows how to recruit, the highest award I can think of is 2nd team all B1G by Hammons as a junior and honorable mention by Davis as a junior. None of these guys have proven to be dynamic players along the lines of JJ/Moore/Hummel or in more recent years Kaminsky/ Dekker/ Russell/ Okafor/ Harris/ Stauskas/ Burke/ Oladipo, etc. The players you list are mostly good, solid players who can help you win games, but we need some dynamic game changers to go along with them if we want to do more than an occasional sweet 16 run. Even the 2 sweet 16 runs in the Painter era were accompanied by 2 guys who were top 50 in Moore and JJ and another who played like it in Hummel.

Out of all of these players, maybe Edwards can reach that level and give us something special, but he needs some help. Who can Painter add that will not just fill a role, but will make a difference and get us over the top against really talented teams in March?

I understand what you are saying and there is a lot of truth to it, but you gloss over some facts on your way to the point....
1. All B1G teams are in contention for a lot of good players. Even MSU.
2. Wasn't Davis B1G Defensive player of the year?
3. Hasn't Hammons been all B1G defensive first teamer the last two years.

But yes, you are correct, every team needs a dynamic player or two that fits their system. And that is what gets teams over the hump....so no arguments with you there. I believe Painter agrees with you, and that is why he is recruiting Biggie the hardest.

One of my issue's is with Painter has been - why he isn't on a "top 40" guy every year. He seems to be doing that now with Biggie this year, Nick Ward next and Scrugs, etc. after that....so with that, hopefully the law of averages works in his favor soon...

I get all B1G teams are in contention. The better teams land some of those studs. Points 2 and 3 are still the 2 players I named. My point wasn't how many accolades but the fact that few players have received them (or in other words, few players are standing out).

I think Painter is on top guys most years, he just doesn't get them. Yes, plenty of lower 4 stars and that's great to build a nucleus, but unless you are an exceptional coach (Smart, Bo Ryan, etc.) you need a few studs to go with that nucleus. That is Painters biggest issue right now IMHO.

 

[cprh9u]

Originally posted by BoilerBF:
Haas - all freshman team
Davis - BTDPOY
AJH - 2nd team all big ten
VE - as you mention a high ceiling
KS - injured last year...but will be an elite 3 pt shooter over next 2 years

The careers of these players aren't over. There is good talent in the program right now...you just choose to assume this group won't accomplish anything of significance.

2009-2011 was a brutal recruiting period. The train has turned around and is going in a very positive direction now.

Haas can be a better offensive player than AJH but I don't think will be the Defensive player he is. Nice piece, but not sure if he will be a difference maker. I said I like RD and AJH, but both are just good solid players, not guys who can take over in a game and dominate with any regularity (both have a few times but its the exception... usually they are just solid). VE, I agree and Stephens... man, I had really high hopes for him. I think he has the ability and think he can turn it around, but I feel far less certain now than a year ago.

 

[cprh9u]

Originally posted by ustankass:
Cprh9u, honest question, and I guess to any other painter "dislikers" I know it's a big if, but what will you say if Swanigan commits? Will it then become "well so he got one, he needs to get more than that"? Or will you give credit where credit is due? I understand getting one recruit doesn't equal wins, but a huge critique of painter is his "inability" to land big time recruits and this would put a rest to it, for at least a little bit. It's easy to to complain when things are bad, but will you eat crow if that happens?

Posted from Rivals Mobile

I would put it to rest for a bit, at least on the recruiting end of things (which is my biggest issue with Painter). Swanigan would make me happy for a while, not because he is a huge position of need or because I think he will be great (I think very good but not exceptional) but he needs to get a Swanigan or 2007 type of class more often to keep the talent flowing in addition to the solid guys like AJH, RD, VE, etc. Otherwise I don't see us exceeding what Painter has already done like an occasional B1G championship (1 in 10 years) and occasional sweet 16 run (2 in 10).

 

[ustankass]

Originally posted by cprh9u:

Originally posted by ustankass:
Cprh9u, honest question, and I guess to any other painter "dislikers" I know it's a big if, but what will you say if Swanigan commits? Will it then become "well so he got one, he needs to get more than that"? Or will you give credit where credit is due? I understand getting one recruit doesn't equal wins, but a huge critique of painter is his "inability" to land big time recruits and this would put a rest to it, for at least a little bit. It's easy to to complain when things are bad, but will you eat crow if that happens?

Posted from Rivals Mobile

I would put it to rest for a bit, at least on the recruiting end of things (which is my biggest issue with Painter). Swanigan would make me happy for a while, not because he is a huge position of need or because I think he will be great (I think very good but not exceptional) but he needs to get a Swanigan or 2007 type of class more often to keep the talent flowing in addition to the solid guys like AJH, RD, VE, etc. Otherwise I don't see us exceeding what Painter has already done like an occasional B1G championship (1 in 10 years) and occasional sweet 16 run (2 in 10).

Agreed! He can't have lulls like he did between the baby boilers and the recent classes. I think/hope that he has learned from his years of missing. I agree about Swanigan, I think he will be a very good player, I would think Dejuan Blair type of game, which is very good. One player does not a career make, he must keep the train moving forward (sorry for the pun).
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[TJBoiler]

Inspector Fife DID say that. Now I was listening to the radio so no it's not quote by quote. I assume I could go to JMV's website and dig up the podcast. Fife was not dogging Painter but making a point about recruiting players to play a certain style of Basketball that fit into said style.

Purdue could not hit 3 pointers this year with an inside game. They could hit 3 pointers and were pretty good with a talented team in the baby Boilers. I do like Painter and obviously don't want him to cheat.

But why does Butler get players like that Jones? How the heck did Crean just get that 5 star 6'10 McDonalds player when Crean is about done at IU? I question why Painter his struggles in recruiting.

It is no secret that Painter was a big fan of Bobby Knight. I have seen Knight do Purdue games and compliment Painter. Painter runs the motion offense preaches hard nosed man to man defense. He finally put in a zone defense. These points of emphasis were all Knight trademarks. However at the end of Knights career at IU. Knight's IU teams were not winning the way they had in the past. Which covered up all the other Knight BS.

You do have to have talent to win at a certain level. I am going to throw out some names of highly rated players who passed on Purdue BUT should have at least considered Purdue. Branden Dawson? He was considered almost a lock. Yet he slipped away. Yes I know the excuse about MSU tinkering or Dawson's reps wanting something. Gary Harris? His freaking mom played basketball at Purdue. Glenn Robinson Jr? My understanding contrary to this talk about Glenn Jr. not wanting to play at Purdue is Matt never really recruited him that hard.

Bottom line Matt got the program turned back around but it still barely got into the tournament. I am not expecting Swanigan to go to Purdue. You can argue about it but the track record shows Matt is not a very good recruiter. You do have to get at least 1 or 2 talented players to play for your team. Then you develop role players and players with potential. Any E Moores or Hummels on the current roster? I'd say NO. There is a J. Johnson in Haas. When is the last time Purdue landed an Indiana Mr. Basketball? I am simply trying to understand why the recruiting struggles. Is it budget? Personality? Selling point? I don't expect Duke recruiting.

I don't hate Purdue. I have been following Purdue basketball since 1984. But I don't sit around with gold and black glasses on blaming the refs when Purdue loses. Accusing of other teams of cheating when they land a player Purdue wanted. I would hope that Purdue can land some decent recruits. Currently Cline who I like is rated 149th a 3 star recruit. But no 4 or 5 stars. Not one. I'd just like to see Matt get one guy. IU got that Mcdonalds all american.

 

[BoilerDaddy]

I think that the experiences of the last few years have taught Painter to be more direct with recruits and not less. The program that I've heard Painter specifically mention as one that he is trying to emulate is Wisconsin, and Bo also has a reputation for being honest and direct with recruits.

I don't understand dwelling on the players who didn't choose to come to Purdue. I really like the roster that Painter has assembled right now. Its filled with really good young players who appear to buy in fully and fit the system.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[BBG]

Originally posted by BoilerDaddy:
I think that the experiences of the last few years have taught Painter to be more direct with recruits and not less. The program that I've heard Painter specifically mention as one that he is trying to emulate is Wisconsin, and Bo also has a reputation for being honest and direct with recruits.

I don't understand dwelling on the players who didn't choose to come to Purdue. I really like the roster that Painter has assembled right now. Its filled with really good young players who appear to buy in fully and fit the system.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

Exactly this. People that complain like this think that somehow Painter just is either giving up on a recruit or not putting in enough effort or whatever. What more can ANY coach do that Painter didn't do with Biggie (as an example)? Swanigan even said that Purdue was recruiting him the hardest.

Not being honest with a recruit just leads to problems IMO. They come here, find out it isn't what they were told, chemistry issues happen and we are back in the quagmire of the 2 year downfall. Painter I think learned from that mistake and won't make it again.

There is quite a bit of talent on the roster and going forward this team will be very good. We all have to remember that these were freshmen that played a LOT of minutes this season and we still made it to the NCAAs tourney.