ADVERTISEMENT

Painter realizes shortfalls

Gman544

Redshirt Freshman
Feb 20, 2018
1,277
1,694
113
Painter now gets that quickness and athleticism is missing in his teams. But still appears to be looking for a backup guard,not a game changer from the portal.

Hope this is ok to post from 24/7:

Purdue basketball coach Matt Painter puts disappointing end to season into perspective



Purdue had a terrific season, winning Big Ten regular-season and tournament titles, but one that ended in heartbreak with the second-ever No. 1 seed loss to a No. 16 seed at the NCAA Tournament. And at the Final Four, NCAA.com's Andy Katz asked Purdue coach Matt Painter to put the season into perspective.

"Well the two things that come out more than anything is that in the last six years, we’ve been a top-5 seed in every one of those tournaments," Painter said. "We’re doing some really good things, we’re doing things the right way. We’re growing our program, we’re winning championships, but we’re getting into the tournament and getting beat by the same team in almost the same game. Struggle shooting the basketball, turning the basketball over. And those two things together are gonna get you beat. And have to do a better job of taking care of the basketball.

"But we also have to do a better job with quickness. Eight years ago after we had lost for a couple years, I really went back to the drawing board about how we had to do things. Our evaluations have really, really improved. Our camaraderie as a group has really improved, and we’ve really made leaps and bounds, made some jumps, got to an Elite Eight, got to some Sweet 16s. But we keep getting beat by the same team, so we gotta get some subtle changes."



One of those subtle changes involves getting more athletic.

"With that, where I’ve erred is we haven’t had enough quickness," Painter said. "When we’ve had Carsen Edwards, when we’ve had Jaden Ivey, it’s given us that punch. And we just don’t quite have that same punch if we don’t have a guy like that if we turn the ball over and don’t shoot well. So your whole things is a coach is when you don’t shoot the ball well, can you still beat quality teams? And that’s what we gotta be able to do. So I think we gotta be able to make some subtle changes there and get more quickness. We have some more athleticism coming. I’m excited, obviously disappointed, but you gotta turn the other cheek and move on as a competitor and get better because of it."



Katz asked Painter whether Purdue would try to improve its team through the transfer portal



"Yeah, you know with us losing David Jenkins, we’ll definitely try to get a point, a combo to give us some quickness, somebody who can break somebody down, and also someone who can contain the dribble," Painter said. "Being able to do both of those things, I think would really help us. We have a guy sitting out that’s really in Cam Heide going to give us a lot of athleticism. Myles Colvin is very athletic, who’s a freshman who’s coming. So I think the length, the athleticism, we’ve made those improvements. We have a very good front-line with or without Zach (Edey). But if we can add that quickness, I think that would really help us."
 
It's not like David Jenkins was his plan A, he took like the plad D choice, and made the best of it. He knew he needed a point gaurd, its not like you get whatever you want, and thats a struggle in college basketball. Painter has been week in getting transfers, but maybe a lot of that has to do with already having solid players that stay.
 
24/7 also had an article today about the best possible matches for LJ Cryer. Not surprisingly Purdue was on the list. The concerning part was they specifically mentioned PU's desire to feed the post so much and whether the PU alliance would be willing to spend the $$ necessary to get him. He has said he wants to be a PG at his next school. I don't think feeding the post 90% of the time is what he is thinking of for a PG. Maybe CMP can convince him otherwise......
 
One way to counteract athleticism is with a zone defense. If Painter is unwilling to institute a zone defense to change things up during games, he really isn't serious about "changing" anything. FDU could have been emasculated by a zone defense. With our front line they would have gotten destroyed. I don't understand Painter's "mindblock".
 
Completely agree. Why we dont go zone against team
One way to counteract athleticism is with a zone defense. If Painter is unwilling to institute a zone defense to change things up during games, he really isn't serious about "changing" anything. FDU could have been emasculated by a zone defense. With our front line they would have gotten destroyed. I don't understand Painter's "mindblock".
s that can exploit edey on defense just shows painter isnt serious about winning and cares more about going down HIS way
 
One way to counteract athleticism is with a zone defense. If Painter is unwilling to institute a zone defense to change things up during games, he really isn't serious about "changing" anything. FDU could have been emasculated by a zone defense. With our front line they would have gotten destroyed. I don't understand Painter's "mindblock".
Username checks out.
 
One way to counteract athleticism is with a zone defense. If Painter is unwilling to institute a zone defense to change things up during games, he really isn't serious about "changing" anything. FDU could have been emasculated by a zone defense. With our front line they would have gotten destroyed. I don't understand Painter's "mindblock".
agreed. if Painter was really interested in changing, he would have done so 5 years ago. He didn't change a thing, and it's highly unlikely that he will.
 
Anyone suggesting a zone against a modern offense is an old man telling at cloud. It's as dead as class basketball it was last used in. A gimmicky box and 1 scheme at this point, used for a couple plays to neutralize a specific player. There's a reason nobody in college basketball uses it. You old heads might as well hope that the NCAA removes the shot clock and Painter try a Four Corners offense.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: z_one
Anyone suggesting a zone against a modern offense is an old man telling at cloud. It's as dead as class basketball it was last used in. A gimmicky box and 1 scheme at this point, used for a couple plays to neutralize a specific player. There's a reason nobody in college basketball uses it. You old heads might as well hope that the NCAA removes the shot clock and Painter try a Four Corners offense.
Ok, I'll be at the bar if you need me....in da zone
 
Anyone suggesting a zone against a modern offense is an old man telling at cloud. It's as dead as class basketball it was last used in. A gimmicky box and 1 scheme at this point, used for a couple plays to neutralize a specific player. There's a reason nobody in college basketball uses it. You old heads might as well hope that the NCAA removes the shot clock and Painter try a Four Corners offense.
As long as Painter is going to play in the past with a traditional Center focused offense then he might as well live in the past with a zone defense in specific situations. I never advocated for it being the primary defense. However, when you see a team like FDU living in the paint and you have 7'4, 6'10, and 6'8 on the front line then the defensive scheme is a total joke. We have over 350 offensive plays in the play book according to different articles, surely there is room for a defense that can stop a team like FDU, North Texas, Little Rock, or St.Peter's. I'm for using what works in any given situation. If something isn't working change it up! Maybe you don't know enough to know what you are watching? Most coaches change up both and I have watched numerous games THIS year where teams were switching and many times running a zone D. It's absolutely absurd to allow your 7'4 guy to be pulled out to the top of the key only to be burned again and again.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, insisting on our 7’-4” 300 pound guy chasing a 6-6” guy around the 3 point line is insane.
I agree we aren’t switching 1-5 but did anyone watch how UCONN handled the PNR? Center jumped and forced SDSU to adjust the play and removed driving lanes. Got help side as SDSU center moved to the lane so the center could recover.

Not sure Zach has the speed or agility to do that but drop coverage eventually killed us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: z_one
As long as Painter is going to play in the past with a traditional Center focused offense then he might as well live in the past with a zone defense in specific situations. I never advocated for it being the primary defense. However, when you see a team like FDU living in the paint and you have 7'4, 6'10, and 6'8 on the front line then the defensive scheme is a total joke. We have over 350 offensive plays in the play book according to different articles, surely there is room for a defense that can stop a team like FDU, North Texas, Little Rock, or St.Peter's. I'm for using what works in any given situation. If something isn't working change it up! It's obvious that you know little about modern or old offenses or defenses. Most coaches change up both.
FDU shot 38% from the field and scored 63 points on 62 shots. Any coach would take that defensive effort. What would you want a zone to accomplish?
See if you can articulate your thoughts without resorting to ad-hominem attacks.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: z_one and nitrowars
Anyone suggesting a zone against a modern offense is an old man telling at cloud. It's as dead as class basketball it was last used in. A gimmicky box and 1 scheme at this point, used for a couple plays to neutralize a specific player. There's a reason nobody in college basketball uses it. You old heads might as well hope that the NCAA removes the shot clock and Painter try a Four Corners offense.
Do you watch anything besides B1G? I ask because your comments would suggest you don't. Kansas, Kentucky, Duke all used some sort of zone multiple times this past season. Self even talked about how effective it was in a particular game during a press conference. I don't know of anyone on here that has suggested it be used as a primary defense, or even close to it. It's a tool that many coaches have in their arsenal to mix things up. No idea where the "old man" comment comes from? If anything, it would be an old man attitude to insist on doing the same thing no matter the opponent or the game situation.
 
FDU shot 38% from the field and scored 63 points on 62 shots. Any coach would take that defensive effort. What would you want a zone to accomplish?
See if you can articulate your thoughts without resorting to ad-hominem attacks.
Sean Miller used a zone for a few possessions to throw Kennesaw State off their rhythm, and it worked.
 
Love armchair coaches you need tall guards to play zone athletic tall guards we have neither quit blaming painter a coach's job is to get players open he did his job we shot 19% from three
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 22larry22 and z_one
FDU shot 38% from the field and scored 63 points on 62 shots. Any coach would take that defensive effort. What would you want a zone to accomplish?
See if you can articulate your thoughts without resorting to ad-hominem attacks.
You mean like you did? Calling out people for being old? Practice what you preach sonny. You didn't see FDU score in the paint time after time? North Texas and St Peter's did the same. If we hit shots it didn't matter. We should have stopped them no matter what. I have argued all year that allowing Zach to be pulled out to the top of the key is a mistake. He can guard no one out there. A zone would keep him in that area that he needs to be. 38% still beat us, 36% we would have won.
 
Love armchair coaches you need tall guards to play zone athletic tall guards we have neither quit blaming painter a coach's job is to get players open he did his job we shot 19% from three
So our short nonathletic guards can do a better job of covering those taller more athletic guards in man?
 
Do you watch anything besides B1G? I ask because your comments would suggest you don't. Kansas, Kentucky, Duke all used some sort of zone multiple times this past season. Self even talked about how effective it was in a particular game during a press conference. I don't know of anyone on here that has suggested it be used as a primary defense, or even close to it. It's a tool that many coaches have in their arsenal to mix things up. No idea where the "old man" comment comes from? If anything, it would be an old man attitude to insist on doing the same thing no matter the opponent or the game situation.
I mean, it's in this thread that we should have employed a zone against FDU, and not as a one off play. Self used it exactly how I described it. A gimmicky play to shut down one player (Nowell).
There was zero reason to switch to zone in the FDU game. One player wasn't torching us, we were more athletic than them, they weren't playing fast and weren't efficient. We were just worse on offense in every respect. Calling for zone is just injecting bias and a reason to complain about Painter's reluctance to change.
It's an old man defense because it was last effective 20 years ago before Steph Curry and analytics took over and suggested 3 points was worth more than two.
Painter has used zone in the last two years exactly as Self did, but this argument isn't based on any kind of rational reason to use a zone.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: BoilerAndy
Painter now gets that quickness and athleticism is missing in his teams. But still appears to be looking for a backup guard,not a game changer from the portal.

Hope this is ok to post from 24/7:

Purdue basketball coach Matt Painter puts disappointing end to season into perspective


Purdue had a terrific season, winning Big Ten regular-season and tournament titles, but one that ended in heartbreak with the second-ever No. 1 seed loss to a No. 16 seed at the NCAA Tournament. And at the Final Four, NCAA.com's Andy Katz asked Purdue coach Matt Painter to put the season into perspective.

"Well the two things that come out more than anything is that in the last six years, we’ve been a top-5 seed in every one of those tournaments," Painter said. "We’re doing some really good things, we’re doing things the right way. We’re growing our program, we’re winning championships, but we’re getting into the tournament and getting beat by the same team in almost the same game. Struggle shooting the basketball, turning the basketball over. And those two things together are gonna get you beat. And have to do a better job of taking care of the basketball.

"But we also have to do a better job with quickness. Eight years ago after we had lost for a couple years, I really went back to the drawing board about how we had to do things. Our evaluations have really, really improved. Our camaraderie as a group has really improved, and we’ve really made leaps and bounds, made some jumps, got to an Elite Eight, got to some Sweet 16s. But we keep getting beat by the same team, so we gotta get some subtle changes."



One of those subtle changes involves getting more athletic.

"With that, where I’ve erred is we haven’t had enough quickness," Painter said. "When we’ve had Carsen Edwards, when we’ve had Jaden Ivey, it’s given us that punch. And we just don’t quite have that same punch if we don’t have a guy like that if we turn the ball over and don’t shoot well. So your whole things is a coach is when you don’t shoot the ball well, can you still beat quality teams? And that’s what we gotta be able to do. So I think we gotta be able to make some subtle changes there and get more quickness. We have some more athleticism coming. I’m excited, obviously disappointed, but you gotta turn the other cheek and move on as a competitor and get better because of it."



Katz asked Painter whether Purdue would try to improve its team through the transfer portal



"Yeah, you know with us losing David Jenkins, we’ll definitely try to get a point, a combo to give us some quickness, somebody who can break somebody down, and also someone who can contain the dribble," Painter said. "Being able to do both of those things, I think would really help us. We have a guy sitting out that’s really in Cam Heide going to give us a lot of athleticism. Myles Colvin is very athletic, who’s a freshman who’s coming. So I think the length, the athleticism, we’ve made those improvements. We have a very good front-line with or without Zach (Edey). But if we can add that quickness, I think that would really help us."

Very good comments. CMP is a winner and the coach of the current B10 champs by 3 games.

Still, everyone can take some criticism, in CMPs case, I find his comments about athleticism mere platitudes........all talk, no action.
Because in the same comments he says he is looking for an athletic guard, similar to Jenkins....instead of a game changer....when athletic game changers, even one interested & visited Purdue in the past is/are available. And he has made little effort in landing an athletic transfer he talks about.
 
Very good comments. CMP is a winner and the coach of the current B10 champs by 3 games.

Still, everyone can take some criticism, in CMPs case, I find his comments about athleticism mere platitudes........all talk, no action.
Because in the same comments he says he is looking for a backup guard, similar to Jenkins....instead of a game changer....when athletic game changers, even one interested & visited Purdue in the past is/are available.
It might be that he knows we don’t have the money to compete for the top class guards, and doesn’t want expectations to get out of hand.
 
24/7 also had an article today about the best possible matches for LJ Cryer. Not surprisingly Purdue was on the list. The concerning part was they specifically mentioned PU's desire to feed the post so much and whether the PU alliance would be willing to spend the $$ necessary to get him. He has said he wants to be a PG at his next school. I don't think feeding the post 90% of the time is what he is thinking of for a PG. Maybe CMP can convince him otherwise......

Do you think he will even try? If so when is he visiting?
 
Yeah, it was defense that lost the last game. Can't believe we allowed 63 points on 62 shots. A zone would have made the difference.

when you haven't been a good outside shooting team for at least the last 15 games of the season, a bad shooting night is to be expected as the norm and should not be a surprise.

When the shortest team in the tourney only has 2 less points in the paint than you WITH your 7'4" dominant post, national player of the year and 6'10 & 6'9 4s running around chasing their quicker and more athletic 6'6" and 6'5" 4 and 5 positions on the perimeter (which, guess what, creates lanes to the hoop and space in the paint that allows shorter players the freedom to not have their shot affected by the bigs), even a bad zone defense neutralizes or takes away that away.

If you can't see how our man-to-man defense enabled a shorter and quicker team (at almost all positions on the floor) with their offensive movement/sets, these very opportunities in the paint, I have a some waterfront property in Arizona to sell you.

In a 5 point loss, all it would take is a small number of those looks to not be there to make all the difference between moving on to round 2 (which we prob would has lost to FAU seeing how they played) and having one of the worst losses in NCAA history on your resume forever.
 
I mean, it's in this thread that we should have employed a zone against FDU, and not as a one off play. Self used it exactly how I described it. A gimmicky play to shut down one player (Nowell).
There was zero reason to switch to zone in the FDU game. One player wasn't torching us, we were more athletic than them, they weren't playing fast and weren't efficient. We were just worse on offense in every respect. Calling for zone is just injecting bias and a reason to complain about Painter's reluctance to change.
It's an old man defense because it was last effective 20 years ago before Steph Curry and analytics took over and suggested 3 points was worth more than two.
Painter has used zone in the last two years exactly as Self did, but this argument isn't based on any kind of rational reason to use a zone.
Self used it against Baylor and TCU also. The KSU game wasn't even the one I was referring to. You obviously don't watch a lot of basketball outside of the B1G. The use of a zone is not a gimmick as you like to use that word. I'm not referring to the FDU game at all. That was someone else that was suggesting it should have been used in the FDU game. I'm refuting the false statements you made in a previous post:

There's a reason nobody in college basketball uses it: Obviously false
It's an old man defense because it was last effective 20 years ago: again false

You didn't address the other coaches that have used zone effectively this past season (not 20 years ago). You need to get outside of your B1G bubble. Here are the list of schools that I have seen play some form of zone this past season. Obviously there are more, but these are ones I saw: I guess all these coaches just thought it was a gimmick. You are way off on this one.

Texas
Kansas
Duke
Kentucky
Marquette
Xavier
Creighton
UCLA
 
Self used it against Baylor and TCU also. The KSU game wasn't even the one I was referring to. You obviously don't watch a lot of basketball outside of the B1G. The use of a zone is not a gimmick as you like to use that word. I'm not referring to the FDU game at all. That was someone else that was suggesting it should have been used in the FDU game. I'm refuting the false statements you made in a previous post:

There's a reason nobody in college basketball uses it: Obviously false
It's an old man defense because it was last effective 20 years ago: again false

You didn't address the other coaches that have used zone effectively this past season (not 20 years ago). You need to get outside of your B1G bubble. Here are the list of schools that I have seen play some form of zone this past season. Obviously there are more, but these are ones I saw: I guess all these coaches just thought it was a gimmick. You are way off on this one.

Texas
Kansas
Duke
Kentucky
Marquette
Xavier
Creighton
UCLA
I watch plenty of basketball, I watched every KState game and a significant number of Kansas games.
You can debate on which adjective I should use to describe it, but there's a reason that's it rapidly fell out of favor and no one has employed it except as a curveball set for a couple plays.
Just because you can point to a time when a coach used it in a singular game doesn't mean it's something we should use every time we're losing.
I don't even understand what you're proposing?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT