ADVERTISEMENT

Purdue 77, Illinois 71 - Game Recap

Travis, you going to post the box score?
GH88eS4XQAAKkSg.jpg
 
I was also impressed how Heide played D on Damask - that guy is a scorer and Heide locked him down a few possessions
IMO Cam is farther along on D than O. He moves his feet well, has some length and strength. He has to make better decision when defending the shot. He has fouled a 3 pt shooter 2 or 3 times in the last couple of games and a soft low foul on the head tonight. I like seeing him in for D...I see some real potential with him down the road
 

Purdue really closed the gap on 2nd chance points in the second half.....holding Illinois to 2 fast break points is ridiculously effective. Boilers did a good job on Hawkins and really good limiting Shannon Jr. Continued to be impressed with Domask - I will be surprised if Illinois doesn't make the second weekend of NCAA play. They could be in Dallas or Boston is my first guess.
 
IMO Cam is farther along on D than O. He moves his feet well, has some length and strength. He has to make better decision when defending the shot. He has fouled a 3 pt shooter 2 or 3 times in the last couple of games and a soft low foul on the head tonight. I like seeing him in for D...I see some real potential with him down the road

He gets in the chair, TJ :)

Thought he got one phantom one last night, but shot challenging w/o fouling can be a learned skill - not surprised with his development.....continuing to sleep on Mr. Heide could be frightening.
 
Purdue really closed the gap on 2nd chance points in the second half.....holding Illinois to 2 fast break points is ridiculously effective. Boilers did a good job on Hawkins and really good limiting Shannon Jr. Continued to be impressed with Domask - I will be surprised if Illinois doesn't make the second weekend of NCAA play. They could be in Dallas or Boston is my first guess.
I expect them to be in the 2nd weekend. However, Seen a lot of brackets with them in the west region as a 4…potential 2nd rd matchup with BYU in SLC. BYU launches 32 3s a game (2nd in country) and Illinois does not guard that well. That’d be a tough matchup for sure but not confident anyone could stop Shannon or Domask.
 
He gets in the chair, TJ :)

Thought he got one phantom one last night, but shot challenging w/o fouling can be a learned skill - not surprised with his development.....continuing to sleep on Mr. Heide could be frightening.
Challenging a shot?! Without fouling?! Does Purdue teach that? I mean, Edey can’t possibly do that right? He has to foul every time! So how could cam do it too?! 😆
 
  • Like
Reactions: tjreese
Challenging a shot?! Without fouling?! Does Purdue teach that? I mean, Edey can’t possibly do that right? He has to foul every time! So how could cam do it too?! 😆
Yes, but in the heat of the moment there is a split second for that decision. Generally on the 3 pt shot you see defenders challenging outside the body on the shooters hand side to try to keep the body fouls down due to momentum in the close out. BTW, Zach went down hard last night. I felt the vibrations in Indiana. Hope he gets some back treatment if needed...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Do Dah Day
How did Hansberry have 4 fouls in 3 minutes? Was he just in there to foul?
 
How did Hansberry have 4 fouls in 3 minutes? Was he just in there to foul?
When Purdue isolates Zach with post feeds and Zach kicks it back out and a bit less movement of others it allows the refs to see the total D on Zach and since he is fouled all the time it is easy to find a foul if fouled as opposed to a lot of action that takes the refs eyes away. That said he probably didn't help himself while the views were on him as much as another naturally stronger and better versed on D
 
If you watched Underwood's presser, he said that they were fouling on purpose (Hansberry). Essentially saying that they wanted Purdue in the bonus so that if the end of the game was tight, they could extend the game with 1 and 1 free throws by Purdue. (Ie. they had fouls to give). Not sure I agree with that strategy, but at least it explains Hansberry's actions.
 
If you watched Underwood's presser, he said that they were fouling on purpose (Hansberry). Essentially saying that they wanted Purdue in the bonus so that if the end of the game was tight, they could extend the game with 1 and 1 free throws by Purdue. (Ie. they had fouls to give). Not sure I agree with that strategy, but at least it explains Hansberry's actions.
It was quite obvious. In 2.5 mins of game time dude picked up 4 fouls. Which also makes the box score in fouls look closer than it was because of this stupidness.
 
If you watched Underwood's presser, he said that they were fouling on purpose (Hansberry). Essentially saying that they wanted Purdue in the bonus so that if the end of the game was tight, they could extend the game with 1 and 1 free throws by Purdue. (Ie. they had fouls to give). Not sure I agree with that strategy, but at least it explains Hansberry's actions.
Well, Purdue throws it to Zach a lot. If Zach "is deep" it is almost a guarantee he scores two. If you foul him before he scores it may not be two...and the clock is stopped. When a team has several bigs especially if they are not part of the offense (NW) then they can foul Zach when he has it deep in theory up to 6 fouls before he shoots. That "could" be 12 points each half or 24 potential points in a game. Then if you add that he is around 70% at the line...it still makes sense to foul him if he is deep and all these situations are counting on a foul being called which many are not.

Fouls to give can be great if ahead, but fouls to give when behind can be great to allow you to be aggressive with "enough" time, but bad if you need a chance to get the ball back and want to send them to the line. Time and score...
 
Well, Purdue throws it to Zach a lot. If Zach "is deep" it is almost a guarantee he scores two. If you foul him before he scores it may not be two...and the clock is stopped. When a team has several bigs especially if they are not part of the offense (NW) then they can foul Zach when he has it deep in theory up to 6 fouls before he shoots. That "could" be 12 points each half or 24 potential points in a game. Then if you add that he is around 70% at the line...it still makes sense to foul him if he is deep and all these situations are counting on a foul being called which many are not.

Fouls to give can be great if ahead, but fouls to give when behind can be great to allow you to be aggressive with "enough" time, but bad if you need a chance to get the ball back and want to send them to the line. Time and score...
Yeah, I understand the theory, it's just that when you are dealing with Edey and the knowledge that he draws more fouls than any other player in the game, it seems like a bad idea to help it along. I guess it depends upon your faith in Big Ten refs (gulp). Up until that time, the refs were generally giving the Illni the better side of the whistle, so yes, they had fouls to give. But you are betting on that continuing, and Big Ten refs aren't exactly known for their consistency. Zach could have gone on tear after that and started drawing multiple fouls. Then suddenly Purdue is in the double bonus with 10 minutes to play.
Just seems like a gamble that has more risk than reward. In this case, it didn't hurt them, but it's not a risk I would have gone with (and in the end, was kinda a moot point anyway because of Smith's dagger threes).
 
Yeah, I understand the theory, it's just that when you are dealing with Edey and the knowledge that he draws more fouls than any other player in the game, it seems like a bad idea to help it along. I guess it depends upon your faith in Big Ten refs (gulp). Up until that time, the refs were generally giving the Illni the better side of the whistle, so yes, they had fouls to give. But you are betting on that continuing, and Big Ten refs aren't exactly known for their consistency. Zach could have gone on tear after that and started drawing multiple fouls. Then suddenly Purdue is in the double bonus with 10 minutes to play.
Just seems like a gamble that has more risk than reward. In this case, it didn't hurt them, but it's not a risk I would have gone with (and in the end, was kinda a moot point anyway because of Smith's dagger threes).
Again, I just laid out some thinking and why Illinois or another team might do such...especially if Zach gets it down low. As in all of life, there is no right answer it is always what you are willing to give up with what you hope to get. I have no idea how old you are, but if old enough you might recall North Carolina State against Houston in 1983 where they started fouling Houston early...course Zach is a better FT shooter than Houston at the time. Here is a nice clip...not so much of the game but of Valvano
 
Well, Purdue throws it to Zach a lot. If Zach "is deep" it is almost a guarantee he scores two. If you foul him before he scores it may not be two...and the clock is stopped. When a team has several bigs especially if they are not part of the offense (NW) then they can foul Zach when he has it deep in theory up to 6 fouls before he shoots. That "could" be 12 points each half or 24 potential points in a game. Then if you add that he is around 70% at the line...it still makes sense to foul him if he is deep and all these situations are counting on a foul being called which many are not.

Fouls to give can be great if ahead, but fouls to give when behind can be great to allow you to be aggressive with "enough" time, but bad if you need a chance to get the ball back and want to send them to the line. Time and score...

If looking at metrics, Zach shoots 62.3%, so expected points is 1.246, is you give him 2 free throws, he shoots at 71.5 so expected points are 1.43. Even if you are not in the double bonus and its a non shooting foul, Edey's expected points would be 1.226, so about the same as letting him shoot from the floor.

A few things throw this off, the 1 3-point, might change it .1, but I doubt it, the distance to rim will make a difference, but basically fouling a 70%+ free throw shooter on purpose and sending him to the line is a bad play from a metrics stand point.

But Edey only shot 4 Ft's, so that wasnt the strategy, just saying you shouldnt foul him on purpose if you are in the bonus.
 
If looking at metrics, Zach shoots 62.3%, so expected points is 1.246, is you give him 2 free throws, he shoots at 71.5 so expected points are 1.43. Even if you are not in the double bonus and its a non shooting foul, Edey's expected points would be 1.226, so about the same as letting him shoot from the floor.

A few things throw this off, the 1 3-point, might change it .1, but I doubt it, the distance to rim will make a difference, but basically fouling a 70%+ free throw shooter on purpose and sending him to the line is a bad play from a metrics stand point.

But Edey only shot 4 Ft's, so that wasnt the strategy, just saying you shouldnt foul him on purpose if you are in the bonus.
I think you mean if they call a foul they shouldn't try to foul when Purdue is in bonus, not the other team? If Zach is deep as in the context I wrote...it is much higher than 62% I suspect. With the metrics you have how is his positioning scoring when left block or right block or in the middle just barely above the arc versus when pushed out 6 or 7 feet from low position. What do the metrics say? I'm guessing they are quite different. My guess is the left block is 1, middle 2 and right block 3 when deep and those spots quite a bit different if out another 6 or 7 feet. What are are the expected points in those situations just in case the populations are different? Is there a position he gets the ball where his scoring is much more efficient than 62.3% since that is an average of some poor shots too far out and some good shots in close. We know teams are not going to foul him behind the arc or at the FT line...or at 8 feet. When do the effective numbers change above the 62.3% average?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lee3370
I think you mean if they call a foul they shouldn't try to foul when Purdue is in bonus, not the other team? If Zach is deep as in the context I wrote...it is much higher than 62% I suspect. With the metrics you have how is his positioning scoring when left block or right block or in the middle just barely above the arc versus when pushed out 6 or 7 feet from low position. What do the metrics say? I'm guessing they are quite different. My guess is the left block is 1, middle 2 and right block 3 when deep and those spots quite a bit different if out another 6 or 7 feet. What are are the expected points in those situations just in case the populations are different? Is there a position he gets the ball where his scoring is much more efficient than 62.3% since that is an average of some poor shots too far out and some good shots in close. We know teams are not going to foul him behind the arc or at the FT line...or at 8 feet. When do the effective numbers change above the 62.3% average?
I think Underwood is full of it. He simply put his Freshman thug in to rough Zach up a bit hoping it would cause Zach to fall off his game....or not.
 
I think Underwood is full of it. He simply put his Freshman thug in to rough Zach up a bit hoping it would cause Zach to fall off his game....or not.
Could be...none of us know or probably will ever know. They can beat a lot of teams though.
 
I think Underwood is full of it. He simply put his Freshman thug in to rough Zach up a bit hoping it would cause Zach to fall off his game....or not.
I just remembered a game years ago when Purdue played Northeastern who had Reggie Lewis (RIP) on his team and tried to salvage a game in the tourney against Purdue with at guy sent in to do that. I think Calhoun (ex UConn coach) coached a few years at Northeastern.

 
  • Like
Reactions: tjreese
was Calhoun
I thought that but it lists another coach as a first year coach then in the link above in roster in roster/stats as Karl Fogel. I was surprised because I remembered like you. Maybe it is a misprint?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT