Painter and Caleb in FW

[rjmpu82]

Don't know a lot about most of these recruits. Did get a lot of insight when we were recruiting Brunk since I grew up near Southport and played against his dad a few times. Not personal friends with the family but knew several who are. From what I was told last year, Scruggs is difficult to coach and a marginal student at best. Don't get the impression he would be a good fit at Purdue. Like I said, this is just what friends on that side of town told me last year when we were after Brunk. Scruggs is a great talent but could cause some chemistry issues or off the court issues. Again, just the opinion of those around Southport.

 

[BoilerNGold013]

Don't know a lot about most of these recruits. Did get a lot of insight when we were recruiting Brunk since I grew up near Southport and played against his dad a few times. Not personal friends with the family but knew several who are. From what I was told last year, Scruggs is difficult to coach and a marginal student at best. Don't get the impression he would be a good fit at Purdue. Like I said, this is just what friends on that side of town told me last year when we were after Brunk. Scruggs is a great talent but could cause some chemistry issues or off the court issues. Again, just the opinion of those around Southport.

Sounds like a perfect recruit for Crean.

 

[JohnHoosierr]

I think this is one of the bigger "myths" around. First off, recruiting does reflect your current team. The "Baby Boilers" basically took up 3 different starting spots for 4 full years. That does not put you in an easy position for recruiting when playing time is often the #1 selling point.

Secondly, Purdue did get talent after the Baby Boilers. The next class featured a very good PG, which was 1 position not "part of" the Baby Boilers with Lewis Jackson. There's another starting spot gone - so basically 4 positions were "spoken for" for 3 years. Also in Lewis Jackson's class was Ryne Smith. Not an amazing recruit, but he was ranked #114 in the country, certainly not bad.

The next year, Purdue signed a 4 star recruit in DJ Byrd. Like him or not, Patrick Bade had offers from Butler and Iowa. Kelsey Barlow was a 3 star recruit who also had an offer from Xavier.

In 2010, the "Baby Boilers" senior year, we brought in 2 four star guards - one a PG and one SG - in Anthony Johnson and Terone Johnson - obviously to help fill the void coming. Anthony had offers from Illinois, Ohio State, Iowa, Marquette, etc. Terone was a top 50 recruit. Travis Carroll was an average recruit.

So in terms of the cycle of recruiting surrounding the Baby Boilers career, there WAS plenty of talent on that team. Where Painter struggled recruiting a replacement was obviously at the center position.

However, obviously a lot of the problem was not necessarily in regard to recruiting, I think Painter ran into a string of bad luck. You had a couple guys who did not fit in personality wise with Anthony Johnson and Kelsey Barlow. Then you had a couple very talented players who were hampered by injuries like DJ Byrd and Terone Johnson. It kinda makes me laugh when people say we never have good PG recruits - Terone Johnson was a top 50 player nationally - and was a PG. Just because they may not end up panning out for whatever reason (and I love Terone) doesn't mean they were never good recruits.

Recruiting in basketball is not very forgiving also. During this whole time, we were right there with many very good recruits, but didn't ultimately win those choices. A recruit can only pick 1 school and it doesn't matter if you finish 2nd. I think Painter also lost some really tight battles during this time that could have really moved the dial.

So was it our greatest recruiting period? Of course not. But the people that say he stopped recruiting, we didn't have any decent players come in, etc. is just not correct. Keep in mind even after the "Baby Boilers" were gone, and even though Robbie was there still - we were still a good team and made the NCAA Tournament. If Robbie wasn't there would we have? I don't know - maybe NIT, but it wouldn't have gone from NCAA Tournament team to losing record without him.

Of all those recruits you listed from all those years, the only one worth a damn was jackson, and barlow and ryne a little bit. The recruiting up until 2012 was just awful. Since then it has been much better but I'm not even sure why you're trying to argue we had good recruits from 08 through 11. The highest rated we had was terone who was barely top 50 but turned out to be very overrated anyway. And i dont think ill ever be able to forget the class of hale and lawson. The worst purdue recruiting year in probably decades. Proof was in the pudding with back to back losing seasons. Since 2012 though our recruiting has picked up quite a bit and for the most part i like all the guys we're bringing in. I think carsen is solid but am disappointed we couldn't land some other top guys in 16. 2017 is now critical for our sustained success. Otherwise it will continue to be the roller coaster ride of up and downs that has been painters career.

 

[lbodel]

Of all those recruits you listed from all those years, the only one worth a damn was jackson, and barlow and ryne a little bit. The recruiting up until 2012 was just awful. Since then it has been much better but I'm not even sure why you're trying to argue we had good recruits from 08 through 11. The highest rated we had was terone who was barely top 50 but turned out to be very overrated anyway. And i dont think ill ever be able to forget the class of hale and lawson. The worst purdue recruiting year in probably decades. Proof was in the pudding with back to back losing seasons. Since 2012 though our recruiting has picked up quite a bit and for the most part i like all the guys we're bringing in. I think carsen is solid but am disappointed we couldn't land some other top guys in 16. 2017 is now critical for our sustained success. Otherwise it will continue to be the roller coaster ride of up and downs that has been painters career.

But that's a matter of your own opinion. According to the recruiting services, your top recruits were not their top recruits. You can't just judge recruiting based on the results in college - like you are brushing off Johnson as nothing when he was a top 50 recruit. You can't just dismiss them cause they didn't pan out for one reason or another. They were still recruiting "gets" in real time.

And I never said it was "great"....I said we got some good recruits in that time period that people are saying we didn't.

 

[JohnHoosierr]

But that's a matter of your own opinion. According to the recruiting services, your top recruits were not their top recruits. You can't just judge recruiting based on the results in college - like you are brushing off Johnson as nothing when he was a top 50 recruit. You can't just dismiss them cause they didn't pan out for one reason or another. They were still recruiting "gets" in real time.

And I never said it was "great"....I said we got some good recruits in that time period that people are saying we didn't.

Other than terone I don't believe a single other recruit was rivals top 100 though I may be missing someone.

 

[lbodel]

Other than terone I don't believe a single other recruit was rivals top 100 though I may be missing someone.

Lewis Jackson was a 3 star, #121 recruit with offers from IU, Illinois, etc.

DJ Byrd was a 4 star, #102 recruit with offers from IU, Notre Dame, Xavier, etc.

Anthony Johnson was a 4 star, #101 recruit with offers from Ohio State, Illinois, Iowa, Marquette, etc.

So yes, if your arbitrary cut-off of 100 doesn't count 2 guys ranked 101 and 102, then yes. But these guys were all legit recruits with legit other offers. If we got a commit from a kid with offers from IU, Ohio State, Illinois, etc. - nobody would question it.

 

[JohnHoosierr]

Lewis Jackson was a 3 star, #121 recruit with offers from IU, Illinois, etc.

DJ Byrd was a 4 star, #102 recruit with offers from IU, Notre Dame, Xavier, etc.

Anthony Johnson was a 4 star, #101 recruit with offers from Ohio State, Illinois, Iowa, Marquette, etc.

So yes, if your arbitrary cut-off of 100 doesn't count 2 guys ranked 101 and 102, then yes. But these guys were all legit recruits with legit other offers. If we got a commit from a kid with offers from IU, Ohio State, Illinois, etc. - nobody would question it.

It's not really my arbitrary cut off as much as it is majority of college bball fans. So looks like I was right, other than terone, ZERO top 100 and a bunch of fringe top 100 role player type recruits. Ya, still not seeing all this good recruiting that was supposedly going on. Our three "top" recruits that you listed from over four years wouldn't even be a top 25 class in any given year if combined into one.

 

[bled1720]

Scruggs is, unfortunately, likely going to IU. He's not a Crean fan but likes IU.

 

[bled1720]

I have seen Scruggs 4 times now and I know genius but I just don't see him being Purdue caliber plus I produced. The best of students what comes to character could cause problems I'm not sad were passing on him

 

[BBG]

It's not really my arbitrary cut off as much as it is majority of college bball fans. So looks like I was right, other than terone, ZERO top 100 and a bunch of fringe top 100 role player type recruits. Ya, still not seeing all this good recruiting that was supposedly going on. Our three "top" recruits that you listed from over four years wouldn't even be a top 25 class in any given year if combined into one.

Ultimately it boils down to how a player pans out IMO and rankings mean squat. If a top player goes to a school and flops, does his ranking mean much? Or on the other side, if they are poorly ranked yet explode in college does their ranking matter?

To me people get too wrapped up in such a subjective thing. If they turn in to solid players does it really matter if they were ranked 1 or 100? In my opinion....no.

 

[bled1720]

Also I thought we were in the lead for Williams it's really sad that we're not

 

[70boiler]

I have seen Scruggs 4 times now and I know genius but I just don't see him being Purdue caliber plus I produced. The best of students what comes to character could cause problems I'm not sad were passing on him

I think I catch what you are saying, BUT could you try again in some other words?

 

[punaj]

Ultimately it boils down to how a player pans out IMO and rankings mean squat. If a top player goes to a school and flops, does his ranking mean much? Or on the other side, if they are poorly ranked yet explode in college does their ranking matter?

To me people geat too wrapped up in such a subjective thing. If they turn in to solid players does it really matter if they were ranked 1 or 100? In my opinion....no.

Yep, agreed. Wasn't Kramer ranked poorly and he turned out to be pretty good for us. There are always extremes. Seems that kids ranked anywhere from 50-200 could almost be interchangeable. Really after the top 25, I don't think the rankings evaluators pay all that much attention to kids. They might see someone at an AAU event and that person gets the bump.

 

[JohnHoosierr]

Ultimately it boils down to how a player pans out IMO and rankings mean squat. If a top player goes to a school and flops, does his ranking mean much? Or on the other side, if they are poorly ranked yet explode in college does their ranking matter?

To me people get too wrapped up in such a subjective thing. If they turn in to solid players does it really matter if they were ranked 1 or 100? In my opinion....no.

I agree rankings ultimately don't mean anything, it's how you perform on the court that counts. But rankings for the most part are a good barometer of the type of kids you're getting. Obviously there will always be some outliers.

 

[BBG]

I agree rankings ultimately don't mean anything, it's how you perform on the court that counts. But rankings for the most part are a good barometer of the type of kids you're getting. Obviously there will always be some outliers.

Agree. Theye are players on the current roster that prove that theory imo.

 

[BoilerNGold013]

You also have to remember that the yearly rankings are subjective to the talent level of that year. I thought Indiana had a down year in 2009 in terms of top players and over all talent for the class. On the flip side, 2007 might be the great recruiting class as a whole of the last 25 years. All this crap is so subjective. All that matters is how they do in college. Other than Byrd and Barlow, '09 was a complete bust. '10 was a bust except for Terone. '11 was horrific. Was Painter getting decently ranked players out of high school? Yea I guess. But his college talent and leadership evaluation was complete and utter sh!t. Well I guess he knew who the good players were but probably lost out on them. So maybe those guys were the best he could get? Idk. It does seem like he as done a hell of a lot better with his new salary and consistent assistants. Definitely getting program first guys as helped as well.

 

[IndianapolisHoops]

247 does not have a Purdue writer since Eric left them. I have found them to be less than involved . I personally track recruiting rather than trying to figure out who is guessing right . No recruit says anything to these guys that means anything . Why would they ? I know a lot about Malik I guarantee 100 times more than 247 at a minimum . He follows me and I follow him as does three others of his close family members . And countless friends . But I have no clue where he will go I have never and would never ask him or suggest that he chose us . I can DM anytime and he will DM me back I only ask him about his stats and his brothers stats or if I want to know which tourney his AAU team will be competing in also his AAU coach follows me and I follow him . As does his AAU team , Team Legit . Here is what I base my opinions on if someone close to a player a teammate or relative tells me a Purdue coach was in to see him or he traveled to Purdue to me this says they have interest why would either waste their time ? I could write a book on how many times the coaching staff has been in to see Wilkes , Jackson , Williams and Scruggs both on the AAU circuit and high school levels . Last year Painter wore a path to Southport this year if he has gone no one has reported it this is why I say we have cooled and Brunk was a target last year . Recruiting is a business weather fans like it or not . Players are not kids they don't attend the Prom if their team has an AAU tourney they play . They eat sleep and socialize thru basketball . They have computer break downs on what every team that recruits them does or have done with kids of similar size and skills . I have sat thru many games with the Parents of players and never asked a single question about where a recruit was leaning . So I base my opinion on how much attention the Purdue coaching staff gives a player . A coach cannot comment on a recruit a recruit answers every question with a scripted answer " I like the coach " " They are a great school " " I am blessed to receive an offer " so where does these predictors get their info to say MSU is the leader ? Why would Painter continue to recruit a player he is not even in the top 5 with ? Maybe he didn't read the 247 article . I would caution anyone who thinks he knows what a 16 year old kid is going to do in the future . I have learned this the hard way .

Painter wasn't in at a Southport open gym this year because Scruggs was playing football and Brunk was committed. Joey was never going to Purdue, despite the fact that he likes Painter a lot and is close friends with Cline. Every time some guy would come on the board and say we were leading with Brunk, I would just shake my head knowing it was false. Butler is a great fit for him.