We might have some dog shit “fans”.
Purdue at Indiana: MASTER DISCUSSION THREAD
- Thread starter Travis Miller
- Start date
Did he insert himself? Matt put him in . No doubt this was a precalculated thought. Now why did he do that? I already told you why and said so before the game if it happened. Now, Matt had a reason and if you don't know it is fine, but it wasn't an accident. What would Berg bring that Burgess wouldn't? It appears you are not honing in on particulars and instead are looking at the future or what you believe is the overall effect...and that wasn't the reason Matt put him in. I like Burgess a lot, but today, not tomorrow...why did Matt put Berg in? If you don't know that is fine and if you disagree , but know that too is fine.
And Painter made a really terrible mistake. Wanna know the only player on the team who had a positive +/-? I couldn't tell you why he threw Berg in there or why he ever plays him in anything other than blowouts.
After some time, a few thoughts:
For all the “extend Woodson” shit talking on this board, he now has the edge in head to head matchups with Painter 4-3 (including sweeping Purdue in an Edey NPOY year)
After a week of a lot of Purdue fans being down on Loyer, he’s the only one who showed any poise, consistency, and even heart today.
Finally got a glimpse of the Colvin we were hoping for and Purdue squandered his contributions offensively and defensively.
Smith has been more bad than good since Iowa game and was downright atrocious in the 2nd half today. I mean it looked like he had money on IU.
The no call on Leal kicking Furst in the nuts is absolutely unbelievable. While it didn’t affect the overall outcome, just an absolute travesty and symbolic of some of the officiating Purdue has dealt with lately. Lappas basically guaranteed ejection and high knees comes back with “no foul”. In a season in which we saw a player ejected for the most inadvertent contact to an opponent’s groin, they just let that one fly.
For all the “extend Woodson” shit talking on this board, he now has the edge in head to head matchups with Painter 4-3 (including sweeping Purdue in an Edey NPOY year)
After a week of a lot of Purdue fans being down on Loyer, he’s the only one who showed any poise, consistency, and even heart today.
Finally got a glimpse of the Colvin we were hoping for and Purdue squandered his contributions offensively and defensively.
Smith has been more bad than good since Iowa game and was downright atrocious in the 2nd half today. I mean it looked like he had money on IU.
The no call on Leal kicking Furst in the nuts is absolutely unbelievable. While it didn’t affect the overall outcome, just an absolute travesty and symbolic of some of the officiating Purdue has dealt with lately. Lappas basically guaranteed ejection and high knees comes back with “no foul”. In a season in which we saw a player ejected for the most inadvertent contact to an opponent’s groin, they just let that one fly.
I think it’s 4-4.
Coaches make mistakes all the time. I know you may not have been in that position, but they will assess the other team and their team into what they think they can do and how to defend the other team. Ballo is very limited as far as skill. He is strong and a physical player that is not a threat a few feet from the rim. Matt can't risk Trey to pick up fouls since he is the only inside threat Purdue has at this time. We have seen what happens when Trey picks up fouls the last few games and perhaps why he wasn't as physical today for fear of getting in foul trouble. IU's strength was inside and Purdue's was outside. Berg was given a couple of minutes run since he is the only one physical enough to possibly hold his ground against Ballo. As I said elsewhere IU did this with Durr on Trevion a few years ago and Durr rarely played as well. It was Woody's first year. However, he did a good job for IU as his physical play made it tough on Trevion. Were the refs going to let Purdue play physical with Ballo...we don't know. We do know that fouls on Berg do not affect Purdue's offensive output and we know that if he sends Ballo to the line he may be the same as a turnover...which it was since he missed both instead of scoring. I have no idea how long you have watched basketball, but maybe you read about NC State beating Houston by sending them to the line for much of the game.
So it was a try to see how Berg would do...how the refs would call his play. Nobody expected Berg to all of a sudden be something he wasn't. Instead they wanted him to do what they thought he could as minimal as it may seem to some...and Purdue needed to find out early. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with Matt...other opinions are fine. However, those opinions are always best if you understand the reasoning and then disagree rather than not understanding the reason and disagreeing. This never was a suggestion that Berg was going to be great. It was always a question to see if he were able to use his strengths in this particular matchup...and since he had not played any meaningful minutes for months it had to be a surprise for many...
I was a proponent of giving Berg some minutes in games... Figuring he is 7'3 he's gotta give something....But today he looked like someone who has never played basketball before....After how many years of practicing against Edey? And with loosing Furst next year we need Bergs scholarship to get a big from the portal
It is - they split in '22 and '25 (each home team winning). Indiana swept in '23, and Purdue swept in '24.
I think we will likely get his scholarship to use elsewhere, but we have 2 extra to use if he was to stay.
We have 1 national Gatorade 3 point champion. But how many were state champions? When you look at their high school recruiting profiles and highlight reels and analysis, all you ever read about was how great a 3 point shooter they are. Even Berg and Jacobsen were said to be awesome 3 point shooters. The problem is, that’s all you ever read about or saw in their highlight reels. Harris was the only player the recruiting reviews mentioned his ability to play defense. We didn’t sign any tough and gritty players. We signed a bunch of Reggie miller wanna bes. Wasn’t cline also a 3 point champ? A lot of boiler fans loved him but did he actually do anything other than the basic catch and shoot? I know he made some clutch shots but he make very many steals or blocked shots?
My thoughts are you need more to build a successful team than just 3 point shooters. You really only need 2 shooters! What we really need is more Dennis Rodman types and some Windex cleaners to clear the glass. And we need some height, floor burners and aggressive physical playing guards!
Fans here complain about the refs every single game. Have we had any of our guards foul out? That’s a huge sign of our lack of aggressiveness in the backcourt
I’ve never been a fan of playing a 7 foot center known primarily for his 3 point shooting ability. I want an in your face physical rim protector! I want a wilt chamberlain. I want an Elmore smith! I don’t want some Brad lohaus known for his ability to hit 3’s. I want that guy who played for the pistons and won a bunch of defensive player of the year awards! I want a tank in the middle! I want a Shaq! Doesn’t Shaq have any kids by now? Doesn’t Joe Barry Carroll have any kids? I’d even accept kent benson’s or Weber’s kids!
Some of them aren't. Thankfully, I've never had someone I thought was innocent get convicted. I can't imagine anything that would eat me up inside more wondering how I failed them.
I've lost cases as a prosecutor, but that's inevitable. BRD is a tough standard (for good reason).
One might argue we need a lineup of say Smith, Heide, Loyer, Colvin and say Burgess or Furst that looks to break at all times and do that for change ups when TKR is resting. Or swap out Smith for Cox when he's resting.
Not a major part, just a change of pace plan for when our main offensive effort isn't working.
If your response to every question about any strategy is "coaches know better so shut up" then just type that. It's shorter.
Dude, everyone understands the reasoning. No one is perplexed by the reasoning, the point is that it was faulty reasoning, the end result was highly predictable, and Painter himself recognized it immediately because he pulled him very quickly and didn't play him another minute.
Should have just given Burgess those minutes. He was +2 in his 3 minutes. Only Purdue player with a positive +/-. Would that have stayed that way playing more minutes? Maybe not but was definitely a better option than Berg and may have been better than Furst for the day.
Smith really hurt Purdue today as well but his times inside Assembly Hall have not been kind to him. After 3 games he's 1-2 and averaging...
FR- 4 pts, 6 ast, 2 reb, 3 stl, 1 tov, 1-8 FG, 0-1 3pt, 2-4 FT
SO- 5 pts, 9 ast, 6 reb, 2 stl, 2 tov, 2-14 FG, 0-6 3pt, 1-2 FT
JR- 8 pts, 5 ast, 2 reb, 1 stl, 6 tov, 2-8 FG, 1-3 3pt, 3-4 FT
5.7ppg, 6.7apg, 3.3reb, 2spg, 3tov, 16.7% FG, 10% 3pt, 60% FT
FR- 4 pts, 6 ast, 2 reb, 3 stl, 1 tov, 1-8 FG, 0-1 3pt, 2-4 FT
SO- 5 pts, 9 ast, 6 reb, 2 stl, 2 tov, 2-14 FG, 0-6 3pt, 1-2 FT
JR- 8 pts, 5 ast, 2 reb, 1 stl, 6 tov, 2-8 FG, 1-3 3pt, 3-4 FT
5.7ppg, 6.7apg, 3.3reb, 2spg, 3tov, 16.7% FG, 10% 3pt, 60% FT
no, but sometimes it is obvious. I don't understand why you are continuing to make this an issue. Matt tried something that coaches have been successful doing against a certain player to help shore up an area of weakness. It is that simple, but some had no idea what he was doing and why and howl at the moon. It was a legitimate thought that didn't hurt Purdue in the first half...and yes coaches put a lot more into their thoughts than fans. Does that mean that all they try works? NO, but doing something else might also be worse. I have specifically mentioned Woody using Durr for the same reason in his first season at IU with success.
I have things on Offense and Defense that I wish Purdue would do and they don't. I don't pout and think they are stupid. Instead "I understand" that they have a very unique perspective on their players and the other team that fans don't. That is how I approach it. It appears you don't believe they have a unique and valuable understanding that fans do not, but rest assured, it is fans at every level, in every forum. None of this implies it impossible for a fan to have the best idea, but merely to say they approach that best idea with less information to make that idea or consequences with less understanding of the advantages and disadvantages. If none of this was true...why review film, recruit certain players within a team and actually practice?
Nothing wrong with asking why Purdue did this or didn't do that or wishing PUrdue did such and such to trade off this for that. Questions or comments listing the tradeoffs and advantages and disadvantages of every situation is fine, but statements that this was stupid and that was idiotic provide no depth and are shallow comments. The last sentence is not implied to you, but merely to cover a bit of the general comment on coaches know better.
NO, reading the comments it is easy to see that everyone did not understand? I pointedly asked the reason and was left with crickets.
