Purdue's Kryptonite

[lbodel]

thanks - I owe you some research some day when you are busy. So, the rough play in the lane (PSU) did correlate. I don't recall, did Rutgers play rough in the lane?

Considering Haas had at least three of those 8 vs NW, and PJ/Spike had zero (I think), that is an impressive game for the team.

Rutgers is one of those games I don't put tooooo much stock in statistically. For example, of our 14 turnovers, 3 of them were committed by Tommy Luce and Jon McKeeman. So take those out and we had 11...(Isaac and Caleb had a combined 2).

 

[lbodel]

I'm confused. You present possible challenges but pretty much refute your own suggestions by showing that we've overcome each multiple times.

The reality with this team is that it is versatile enough and doesn't have any big warts that if one facet isn't working, it can shift and overcome. Obviously at some point, that won't happen but I don't think it's because Purdue necessarily vulnerable in any specific area.

It's just a topic that I thought would be interesting to discuss. I'm not saying we're going to lose because 1, 5 or all of those things. There's cases to be made for each one - which is what I was presenting. Sometimes we overcame and still won, sometimes we didn't. Some or our losses had similar problems, some of them were completely different. I think that's one interesting thing about this team - there hasn't been one consistent problem that has plagued this team.

 

[samcboiler]

In March, it's all about match-ups, but you can also play into your undoing...

Which do you think will be Purdue's biggest issue, or lead to its downfall, in March? Granted, not all of these are singular issues (i.e. playing athletic big men can lead to poor output/defense by Purdue, but also lead to below average rebounding).

-Turnovers: Purdue has had 11 or fewer turnovers in the last three games, but it has been a red flag in close wins or losses. At Penn State, 17 turnovers. vs. Minnesota, 14 turnovers. vs. Louisville, 17 turnovers. (And I would include "the press" as part of this category as we've already hashed out the press).

-Rebounding: Purdue's a strong rebounding team, but it's had some slip-ups in some tight games, or losses. Purdue's been outrebounded: @ Northwestern, @ Penn State, vs. IU, @ Nebraska, @ Iowa, @ Louisville. Obviously some of these weren't losses, but some tighter games.

-Three point shooting: If we don't shoot the ball well from the perimeter, it allows teams to clog the interior and provide a rebounding advantage. Games we have shot poorly from the perimeter: @ Northwestern (4-19), @ Michigan (5-16), @ IU (6-21), @ Iowa (11-28) and Minnesota (9-28). There's also been some games where we didn't shoot poorly statistically, but our attempts were high - @ Penn State (12-26 - 14 missed shots). Many of these games were also games we lost the rebounding battle.

-Free Throws: We are great at drawing fouls (and not giving up many). This usually leads to a free throw advantage, and also a high number of free throw attempts, which we have a very solid team percentage. When we have not gotten to the line, we have typically struggled: @ Michigan (8 attempts vs. their 11), @ Nebraska (13 attempts vs. their 24). However, we've also lost games that we had ample free throws: @ Iowa (21-25) and Louisville (16-22).

-Physical/athletic big men: When we've faced some more athletic big men, we have struggled some in the interior. Some notable examples: @ Penn State, Michigan, IU (in a weird way) and Iowa to a degree. Obviously Swanigan has a history of becoming turnover prone when pressure is applied - and he is not athletic to guard guys like a Wagner and other perimeter big men. Obviously Haas is only going to be effective when there's someone similar in size, which not all teams have (remember, Arkansas Little Rock used a small/quick lineup to disrupt and cause turnovers).

-Overall defense: While we have definitely improved defensively, we aren't a shut down team by any means. Mathias has done a great job on many of the league's guards, but obviously we could face some more athletic guards that can challenge our dribble penetration defense. We allowed Michigan to shoot 54%, @ Michigan State 52%, Iowa 57% Minnesota 49%. The good news is that most of those were further back in the season - except Michigan.

-Strength of schedule: We haven't had a bad schedule, but we haven't played a number of Top 15 teams as you can do in a "normal" Big Ten year. We had some good experience playing against one of the best teams in the country (Villanova), and a very solid Louisville team. But we haven't been challenged with team/talent like that really since then. We've faced some pretty good teams - Wisconsin, Notre Dame, etc. - but we've also only faced the top 4 Big Ten teams one team each (Maryland, Minnesota and Wisconsin). In both tournaments, everyone is playing do-or-die. And when we leave the Big Ten to play in the NCAAs, we don't know what to expect (I'm not a Big Ten basher and I think overall there's a lot of parity, but I also can see it being bad for the Big Ten).

I think one of the stranger games of Purdue's season was the Penn State game. You don't want to overanalyze one game, but Penn State shot 42%, 11% from 3, they shot 14 free throws - a pretty normal number, we had 17 turnovers - but they had 16, etc.

The 2 stats that jump out - they outrebounded us and they had 10 blocks. They did a great job on Swanigan who only shot 5 times and 2 of those were 3s. Granted, Haas did have a good game himself, but they were one of the few teams that really isolated Swanigan's effectiveness offensively, and with rebounds.

That being said, there's a plethora of things that can come up. I don't think Purdue has been a "shoot itself in the foot" team so much this year, but they've had some bad matchups that got exposed and ran into some hot shooting teams at times too. Looking at our recent games, obviously the Michigan game stands out - which was a combination of a hard matchup for us and they also happened to have a couple hot shooters. So I'd probably say a bad matchup - particularly on the interior that can minimize Swanigan and our interior strength - would be our kryptonite.

Really like your post as it makes you THINK about what could go wrong. My only real concern in a BIG NCAA game is nerves (they should overcome soon) and the Turnovers / Press. I think Spike needs to be in there when the Press comes and it will come and when the Turnovers start, Painter needs to not hesitate and make lineup changes - quickly... Even if its a 2 minute removal of Swanigan or Carsen or whoever happens to be turnover happy at the wrong time. A quick move to the bench and bring them back in is a great lesson to everyone, no matter how good they are that Turnovers cannot keep happening... I absolutely love this team and its my favorite team in at least 10 years. I'm sure its everyone else's also. However, the nightmare of Little Rock and a double digit lead evaporating in 4 minutes because some dude gets Tony Carr hot and everything he puts up is all net, is still hurting a lot of us. It almost killed me last year at this time... I'm so hoping this young but mature team can show the nation that Purdue Hoops is not just a regional phenomenon, but a national one as well. Go Boilers...

 

[Courthouse Carp]

It's just a topic that I thought would be interesting to discuss. I'm not saying we're going to lose because 1, 5 or all of those things. There's cases to be made for each one - which is what I was presenting. Sometimes we overcame and still won, sometimes we didn't. Some or our losses had similar problems, some of them were completely different. I think that's one interesting thing about this team - there hasn't been one consistent problem that has plagued this team.

We need to banish Lex Luther to Loosierville and think "SMOOTH SAILING . . ."

(have fun at the BTT!)

 

[MJ-79Boiler]

Easy Answer: Dribble Penetration/ scoring in the paint !

- If a team gets 32 pts on layups, dunks and FT we have to shoot better from 3 and out-rebound them to win
- If a team gets 40 of these points, we have to shoot over 50% from 3 and have 8-10 of them to win.
- If a team gets over 50 of these, . . well . . we have NO chance.

Keep in mind, that's also the easiest way to put Biggie and Isaac on the bench, so yeah . . it's our weakness. These rules also match up well with our losses. We just can't spot teams too many easy points in a 70-75 pt game. I personally would LOVE matchups with jump shooting teams - chaulk up the W !