Painter and PGs

[mathboy]

People with soft basketball knowledge always look for the single cause, the cure for not making more of an impact last post-season. "It must be the PG position..." So we get questions like "Why can't Painter recruit/coach/play the right PG?". Folks just looking for the simple answer, so they can be assured we are on the right path. We all want the same thing here.

Over and over, we all need to keep thinking "This is a team game". All the parts need to fit together. Any single player cannot win enough to make the NCAA FF. If you think otherwise, then how many NCAA's did Micheal Jorden win? Magic Johnson was beyond excellent as a player, but he had a great supporting cast playing with him at MSU when they won. Shaq, probably the greatest center to play the game had zero championships in college. It is a team sport.

Trying to find the right personalities and right skills to build a FF team, then having the right luck and right matchups to get there is a fairly difficult task, and one that is not resolved by simple answers.

 

[cprh9u]

To be fair, 11 years is not exactly a "lengthy" time period when often times these players play 4 years (that wouldn't even be 3 cycles yet).

Also, the notion if you don't have a good PG, you won't go anywhere - is just not true. Travis Trice was a third team PG last year - and MSU went to a Final Four. The 2 PGs above him? Hint: They won a combined 1 game in the NCAA Tournament (Melo & Yogi).

First, I'd be happy to have Trice compared to anything Painter has had in a PG. 2nd, 11 years is plenty of time to judge CMP and his ability. What are you saying, a coach needs at least 15 or 20 years to determine how well he is recruiting a position? I posted this before, but here is a list of guards CMP has landed since LJ (underlined transferred/booted early and bold are PG's):

2009- Barlow (talented head case who left early)
2009- Byrd (Sometimes a 4, but including as he should have been a 2/3 but we didn't have a talented frontcourt. Not special but solid)
2010- Anthony Johnson (contributed little and transferred)
2010- TJ (never lived up to his ranking but a solid player on very poor teams)
2012- RJ (talented but only ok results, left early)
2012- RD (like Byrd, not always in the backcourt. Above average thanks to his D but very frustrating on O save the MSU game this year)
2013- Scott (talented but only ok results, left early)
2013- Stephens (really talented, never really developed, left early)
2014- Mathias (solid young player, 5.2 ppg and 40% from the field as a sophomore... not a good B1G starter yet but hopefully can get there)
2014- PJ (good backup PG at this point in his career and glad he's on the team. Forced to be starter due to lack of options)
2015- Weatherford (redshirted and then transferred, which seems odd to lose a year like that)
2015- Cline (4 pts and 36% from the field as a frosh... has time to get better and certainly hope he does)

Painter has been flat awful at recruiting the backcourt outside of a special Moore (who was in his first recruiting class) and a few solid players. PG in particular has been atrocious. Blame RJ and Scott and Stephens and whatever, but if you don't think 100% of this comes back on CMP, then you clearly have an agenda to protect him. He is the coach and is responsible to recruit, develop and keep good basketball players.

 

[mathboy]

First, I'd be happy to have Trice compared to anything Painter has had in a PG. 2nd, 11 years is plenty of time to judge CMP and his ability. What are you saying, a coach needs at least 15 or 20 years to determine how well he is recruiting a position? I posted this before, but here is a list of guards CMP has landed since LJ (underlined transferred/booted early and bold are PG's):

2009- Barlow (talented head case who left early)
2009- Byrd (Sometimes a 4, but including as he should have been a 2/3 but we didn't have a talented frontcourt. Not special but solid)
2010- Anthony Johnson (contributed little and transferred)
2010- TJ (never lived up to his ranking but a solid player on very poor teams)
2012- RJ (talented but only ok results, left early)
2012- RD (like Byrd, not always in the backcourt. Above average thanks to his D but very frustrating on O save the MSU game this year)
2013- Scott (talented but only ok results, left early)
2013- Stephens (really talented, never really developed, left early)
2014- Mathias (solid young player, 5.2 ppg and 40% from the field as a sophomore... not a good B1G starter yet but hopefully can get there)
2014- PJ (good backup PG at this point in his career and glad he's on the team. Forced to be starter due to lack of options)
2015- Weatherford (redshirted and then transferred, which seems odd to lose a year like that)
2015- Cline (4 pts and 36% from the field as a frosh... has time to get better and certainly hope he does)

Painter has been flat awful at recruiting the backcourt outside of a special Moore (who was in his first recruiting class) and a few solid players. PG in particular has been atrocious. Blame RJ and Scott and Stephens and whatever, but if you don't think 100% of this comes back on CMP, then you clearly have an agenda to protect him. He is the coach and is responsible to recruit, develop and keep good basketball players.

I think you left out Octeus, Carter and Hill.

 

[JohnHoosierr]

I think you left out Octeus, Carter and Hill.

None of whom painter developed or recruited out of high school.

 

[mathboy]

None of whom painter developed or recruited out of high school.

Very true John. However, he did recruit them, just not out of high school. Also, I would contend that they also had some development time with Painter, even though they were only with us a season. I think Octeus was primarily a 2-guard, IIRC, and Painter taught him 1-guard skills for example.

 

[nagemj02]

Octeus was the backup and then starting PG in his two seasons at Colorado State:

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/stats/_/id/36/year/2013/colorado-state-rams

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/team/stats/_/id/36/year/2014/colorado-state-rams

 

[cprh9u]

I think you left out Octeus, Carter and Hill.

If your counter argument is 3 5th year guys who were not developed or held on to (no opportunity, obviously) by CMP, then I rest my case. Purdue is not a 1 and done type program. Not one player has left Purdue early to go pro, although plenty have left early to go elsewhere. We have to recruit, develop and KEEP good players, something CMP has not been able to do with guards very much.

 

[FirstDownB]

None of whom painter developed or recruited out of high school.

Hey, at least the man is showing some understanding of his limitations! If you can't develop a PG and the NCAA rules allow harvesting of grad transfers who were able to develop elsewhere, then bada-bing-bada-boom.. Bring in a finished product, one year at a time.
(tic)

 

[Dakota Girl]

I think I get your point. Arcidiacono is a good example of a point guard who would fit great at Purdue. He was a solid top 50 player, but not a 5 star. He didn't carry his team and may not make it in the NBA, but he fit with his teammates. He actually had a reputation as a point guard who couldn't take his team deep into the NCAA Tournament, but that's no longer the case, obviously. The thing that Jay Wright did with Archi (that Painter has talked about wanting to do) is pair a second point guard with him, in this case Jalen Brunson. I really think that would be ideal in Painter's system as well, i.e. starting two point guards who are capable of playing either guard position.

I think that Painter wants a point guard who is a willing and capable scorer, but can play within the flow of the offense, which means giving up the ball and continuing to play without it. I am hoping that Carsen Edwards is that guy.

At the other guard and forward positions, I think a big reason why Painter targeted Mathias, Vince Edwards, and Cline is that they all played a lot of point guard on offense in high school.

You may have layed out the plan as Painter sees it. Carsen may be that type and mesh very well with DM and RC. He could be the type of Point needed instead of a Iverson Marbury style point.

 

[nagemj02]

You may have layed out the plan as Painter sees it. Carsen may be that type and mesh very well with DM and RC. He could be the type of Point needed instead of a Iverson Marbury style point.

I don't think that's what BoilerDaddy meant. He was stating use a 2 PG starting lineup (as an example: P.J. Thompson, Carsen Edwards, Vince Edwards, Caleb Swanigan, Isaac Haas), not one where Thompson or CE is necessarily playing alongside Mathias or Cline.

 

[BoilerDaddy]

I don't think that's what BoilerDaddy meant. He was stating use a 2 PG starting lineup (as an example: P.J. Thompson, Carsen Edwards, Vince Edwards, Caleb Swanigan, Isaac Haas), not one where Thompson or CE is necessarily playing alongside Mathias or Cline.

Not specifically. I could see him going with PJ and CE in late game situations, however, if Carson is ready, maybe with Dakota and VE.

When I posted, I was specifically thinking back to when RJ and Scott were still on the roster and Painter was targeting guys like Ulis and McIntosh and telling them that he would like to start two point guards.

As Dakota Girl commented, I think that it was in the same spirit that he targeted guys with point guard vision and basketball IQ at other positions at the same time that he has brought in point guards (PJ and Edwards) who don't need the ball in their hands 20 seconds a possession.

What I am NOT saying is that I think that Painter has been satisfied with the PG position. It's been an issue for a while which is clearly why Painter made it his priority for 2016.

 

[bonefish1]

You totally misunderstood my point. I am not saying I don't want a 5* player. I am saying I don't want a 5* star who is too selfish to pass a ball, especially at a PG position. There is a reason why PG is an important position, as he needs to distribute the ball. We need a John Stockton kind of player (I know, I know, who wouldn't?) instead of a Stephon Marbury.

In conclusion, I'd rather take a 3 star Stockton than a 5 star Marbury, if we had a choice. But we all know Purdue has never exactly been a hot destination for 5 stars, especially guards. So unless we somehow get lucky and stumbles onto one, focusing our effort into a one and done player who only wants to shoot in college is a wasted effort. We ought to focus our recruiting effort to PG's who can pass, shoot, AND defend, even if he doesn't have the flashiness worthy of a 5 star.

If the PG is the best offensive player of your bunch, I don't want him passing the ball, I want the offense revolve around him. I could give 2 craps whether my PG is a ball hog or not, as long as they're producing. If the PG is the first option in the offense, great! Or is my PG is good enough to pull up for a 3 on a fast break, great!
John Stockton wouldn't have been what he was if he didn't have one of the best power forwards of all time to simply dump the ball into. Same with John Paxson and Steve Kerr. Having Carl Malone and Michael Jordan makes you look really good.

You give off this odd perception that you don't want a high scoring PG. You just want someone who can dribble around the perimeter and eventually feed the post. Why would take a 3 star over a 5 star? Good thing you're not our recruiting coordinator.

 

[lbodel]

First, I'd be happy to have Trice compared to anything Painter has had in a PG. 2nd, 11 years is plenty of time to judge CMP and his ability. What are you saying, a coach needs at least 15 or 20 years to determine how well he is recruiting a position? I posted this before, but here is a list of guards CMP has landed since LJ (underlined transferred/booted early and bold are PG's):

2009- Barlow (talented head case who left early)
2009- Byrd (Sometimes a 4, but including as he should have been a 2/3 but we didn't have a talented frontcourt. Not special but solid)
2010- Anthony Johnson (contributed little and transferred)
2010- TJ (never lived up to his ranking but a solid player on very poor teams)
2012- RJ (talented but only ok results, left early)
2012- RD (like Byrd, not always in the backcourt. Above average thanks to his D but very frustrating on O save the MSU game this year)
2013- Scott (talented but only ok results, left early)
2013- Stephens (really talented, never really developed, left early)
2014- Mathias (solid young player, 5.2 ppg and 40% from the field as a sophomore... not a good B1G starter yet but hopefully can get there)
2014- PJ (good backup PG at this point in his career and glad he's on the team. Forced to be starter due to lack of options)
2015- Weatherford (redshirted and then transferred, which seems odd to lose a year like that)
2015- Cline (4 pts and 36% from the field as a frosh... has time to get better and certainly hope he does)

Painter has been flat awful at recruiting the backcourt outside of a special Moore (who was in his first recruiting class) and a few solid players. PG in particular has been atrocious. Blame RJ and Scott and Stephens and whatever, but if you don't think 100% of this comes back on CMP, then you clearly have an agenda to protect him. He is the coach and is responsible to recruit, develop and keep good basketball players.

But again, now you're limiting it to 6 years?

First off, you can't complain only about recruiting and ignore results (i.e. Thompson statistically is a pretty darn good PG). And then you can't just look at results and expect a first/second team player and wonder why in a short time period we haven't had a great PG - and ignore the recruiting results.

In theory, we HAVE recruited good point guards. Ronnie Johnson and Bryson Scott were both very solid PG recruits. Again, as I mention, the fact that we have revisit those situations and explain them in 2016 is baffling to me.

If Ronnie Johnson was 60% the Boilermaker that his brother was, we would love the guy. It turns out, and what we didn't know, was he turned out to be a very selfish player (who had an influence come into his life once he got to Purdue in his father that was a major part of that problem).

Bryson Scott is another guy who was a very solid PG recruit. He came to Purdue, tried to force things (as many kids do) and wasn't willing to be patient and be coached. I wouldn't say that in a negative way per se, but he MADE those choices. And reflecting back - he acknowledged it basically by saying he wish he didn't leave.

So yes, we've had 2 "busts" occur in the last few years and there's very logical explanations to them. It just happened to be 2 at the same position. Let's not act like a Ronnie Johnson couldn't happen at any other position. Nobody's handed anything. Mathias could take the same attitude and think he should be shooting 10 threes a game whenever he wants then wonder why he's benched - or he can be coached and play logically and do really well, which he's done.

You make it out to sound like our roster is a bunch of average players. We weren't a top 20 team this year because of just AJ.

 

[mathboy]

Painter has been flat awful at recruiting the backcourt outside of a special Moore (who was in his first recruiting class) and a few solid players. PG in particular has been atrocious. Blame RJ and Scott and Stephens and whatever, but if you don't think 100% of this comes back on CMP, then you clearly have an agenda to protect him. He is the coach and is responsible to recruit, develop and keep good basketball players.

Really? "Awful at recruiting the back court " ? You got to be kidding me. So you are saying he has been awful, except for all the good players he has recruited? Sorry, but it is your agenda that is showing. Your logic and argument don't seem to fit how I happen to think about this issue, I guess it is because I want to look at all the players Painter recruited, not just cherry pick the weak ones. Come on man!

 

[JohnHoosierr]

But again, now you're limiting it to 6 years?

First off, you can't complain only about recruiting and ignore results (i.e. Thompson statistically is a pretty darn good PG). And then you can't just look at results and expect a first/second team player and wonder why in a short time period we haven't had a great PG - and ignore the recruiting results.

In theory, we HAVE recruited good point guards. Ronnie Johnson and Bryson Scott were both very solid PG recruits. Again, as I mention, the fact that we have revisit those situations and explain them in 2016 is baffling to me.

If Ronnie Johnson was 60% the Boilermaker that his brother was, we would love the guy. It turns out, and what we didn't know, was he turned out to be a very selfish player (who had an influence come into his life once he got to Purdue in his father that was a major part of that problem).

Bryson Scott is another guy who was a very solid PG recruit. He came to Purdue, tried to force things (as many kids do) and wasn't willing to be patient and be coached. I wouldn't say that in a negative way per se, but he MADE those choices. And reflecting back - he acknowledged it basically by saying he wish he didn't leave.

So yes, we've had 2 "busts" occur in the last few years and there's very logical explanations to them. It just happened to be 2 at the same position. Let's not act like a Ronnie Johnson couldn't happen at any other position. Nobody's handed anything. Mathias could take the same attitude and think he should be shooting 10 threes a game whenever he wants then wonder why he's benched - or he can be coached and play logically and do really well, which he's done.

You make it out to sound like our roster is a bunch of average players. We weren't a top 20 team this year because of just AJ.

Statistically Travis Carroll was a good center. He had a really high fg%. Other than maybe Rutgers and one other really bad team, Pj would be a backup on all the others in the big.


Stats don't tell the whole story. No objective person would agree that painter has done a good job with guards. Other than etwaun the guards that have come through have been pretty mediocre. Our bigs usually carry the team.

 

[Dakota Girl]

You give off this odd perception that you don't want a high scoring PG. You just want someone who can dribble around the perimeter and eventually feed the post. Why would take a 3 star over a 5 star? Good thing you're not our recruiting coordinator.

i would agree with the lower scoring guard given same or very similar talent. That also assumes we have another guard who can create. It's about skills balance.

 

[lbodel]

Statistically Travis Carroll was a good center. He had a really high fg%. Other than maybe Rutgers and one other really bad team, Pj would be a backup on all the others in the big.


Stats don't tell the whole story. No objective person would agree that painter has done a good job with guards. Other than etwaun the guards that have come through have been pretty mediocre. Our bigs usually carry the team.

But you know what was the persistent complaint prior to AJ's arrival? Purdue couldn't recruit centers!

Tom Crean has recruited the most 5 stars in the Big Ten - how's their front court been? Doesn't mean you can't have a good team.

You don't become a top 20 team with "back up" caliber guards. You just don't. Is PJ amazing? No. Do we need to diminish what he's done up until this point in his career and compare him to Travis Carroll? Absolutely not.

 

[mathboy]

Statistically Travis Carroll was a good center. He had a really high fg%. Other than maybe Rutgers and one other really bad team, Pj would be a backup on all the others in the big.


Stats don't tell the whole story. No objective person would agree that painter has done a good job with guards. Other than etwaun the guards that have come through have been pretty mediocre. Our bigs usually carry the team.

Other than Etwaan.... Okay, how about Kramer, Mathias, or LewJack? Even Stevens, before this year, would have made the list for "good guards". I think I would put Terone Johnson and Keaton Grant in the good guard list as well.

Have we had all-conference guards? Not enough. Have we had good guards? Yes. Those all-conference types don't come around too often.

I find that argumentative postings that start with all the exceptions to their position that don't count. You know, "Other than all the good ones, Painter has done a terrible job..." I know that is not how you stated your positon, but excluding Etwaan does weaken your arguement because Painter should get credit for Moore regardless.