Ray, my man!

[SnowLeopard]

“For Ray, he’s had more adversity than some of the (good leaders) we’ve had,” Painter says. “If you look at (former Boiler standouts Robbie Hummel, E’Twaun Moore and JaJuan Johnson), we were successful. We went to the NCAA tourney every year. Ray didn’t come into that. We didn’t go to the NCAA Tournament his freshman and sophomore years. Through that, he never wavered where we had some guys who did waver. They gave into things. Ray never did.

You really find someone’s true character through tough times. Ray has proven he’s a Purdue guy. No matter what we asked of him, he always had a positive attitude. He always tried to do it. Just go out and compete.

“He’s had a lot more ammunition, in terms of negative stuff, to battle than other people. He’s really shown his leadership through that.”


http://www.elkharttruth.com/sports/...due-s-Rapheal-Davis-a-real-father-figure.html

 

[BoilerStutz]

I am not sure that there is another college basketball player who has had such a dramatic, positive impact on the culture of his/her basketball program. This guy is going to be very successful if life regardless of the path he chooses. Good for him!

 

[champ1]

Big, Big, big fan of Davis. Love his game!

 

[woggy718]

Big, Big, big fan of Davis. Love his game!

He basically single handed willed us back to a winning culture

 

[champ1]

if I'm an NBA GM, I am finding a spot on my roster for this kid. Flat out winner who could become one of the better defensive specialists in the league over time...... because he is willing.

 

[PU pit bull]

And a damn nice guy to boot. Come to think of it, it seems like most of PU's "tough" players were/are very genuine human beings. Cardinal, Foster, Lowe, Kramer, Hummel, Davis, etc. I'm sure I'm missing more, but you get the drift.

 

[BoilerStutz]

Painter seems to really get this culture/climate stuff after having had to deal with some real head cases. It is amazing what you can get done with good people whose interests are aligned.

 

[lbodel]

Painter seems to really get this culture/climate stuff after having had to deal with some real head cases. It is amazing what you can get done with good people whose interests are aligned.

This is why people need to take into account systems.

Purdue's a lot like a Wisconsin - the system isn't overly "sexy", but it's proven to be successful if you buy into it. Wisconsin has some good recruits, but most of their team are "high-end" 3 stars with some highly talented guys sprinkled in here and there.

I'm in DC and Georgetown is a team I'll watch and go to a game or 2 - it's a school that gets talented guys year after year. But they don't really have an identity. They don't really have a thing to fall back on all the time. So they can pull off some real big wins, they can look great at times, but they have trouble with consistency (hence, problems in the NCAA Tournament).

You can't just focus on stars and get pissed off if we offer a 3 star player. Quite frankly, a lot of our issues were the more talented recruits we had. It's not that we knew they were problems going into it - but when a team struggles, the guys who are "better" may become more selfish or think they should be the stars. And it's not saying we should never recruit guys who are talented players. But you still need guys who really fit the system. Swanigan was a real high-profile guy, but he fits in at Purdue.

 

[tjreese]

This is why people need to take into account systems.

Purdue's a lot like a Wisconsin - the system isn't overly "sexy", but it's proven to be successful if you buy into it. Wisconsin has some good recruits, but most of their team are "high-end" 3 stars with some highly talented guys sprinkled in here and there.

I'm in DC and Georgetown is a team I'll watch and go to a game or 2 - it's a school that gets talented guys year after year. But they don't really have an identity. They don't really have a thing to fall back on all the time. So they can pull off some real big wins, they can look great at times, but they have trouble with consistency (hence, problems in the NCAA Tournament).

You can't just focus on stars and get pissed off if we offer a 3 star player. Quite frankly, a lot of our issues were the more talented recruits we had. It's not that we knew they were problems going into it - but when a team struggles, the guys who are "better" may become more selfish or think they should be the stars. And it's not saying we should never recruit guys who are talented players. But you still need guys who really fit the system. Swanigan was a real high-profile guy, but he fits in at Purdue.

Have a daughter in Gaithersburg and just about to finish at Georgetown...crazy drivers out there. if you want to find winners (not necessarily those that will get you a win) attitude wise, you look to the defensive end. That is not to say that great offensive players don't want to win or put you in a position of winning, it is that the things required to be good defensively or a warrior mindset. High profile players are many times about "me" and obviously enough of them do win, but there is nothing wrong with having a few warriors on the team

 

[tjreese]

This is why people need to take into account systems.

Purdue's a lot like a Wisconsin - the system isn't overly "sexy", but it's proven to be successful if you buy into it. Wisconsin has some good recruits, but most of their team are "high-end" 3 stars with some highly talented guys sprinkled in here and there.

I'm in DC and Georgetown is a team I'll watch and go to a game or 2 - it's a school that gets talented guys year after year. But they don't really have an identity. They don't really have a thing to fall back on all the time. So they can pull off some real big wins, they can look great at times, but they have trouble with consistency (hence, problems in the NCAA Tournament).

You can't just focus on stars and get pissed off if we offer a 3 star player. Quite frankly, a lot of our issues were the more talented recruits we had. It's not that we knew they were problems going into it - but when a team struggles, the guys who are "better" may become more selfish or think they should be the stars. And it's not saying we should never recruit guys who are talented players. But you still need guys who really fit the system. Swanigan was a real high-profile guy, but he fits in at Purdue.

Have a daughter in Gaithersburg and just about to finish at Georgetown...crazy drivers out there. if you want to find winners (not necessarily those that will get you a win) attitude wise, you look to the defensive end. That is not to say that great offensive players don't want to win or put you in a position of winning, it is that the things required to be good defensively have a warrior mindset. High profile players are many times about "me" and obviously enough of them do win, but there is nothing wrong with having a few warriors on the team

 

[lbodel]

Have a daughter in Gaithersburg and just about to finish at Georgetown...crazy drivers out there. if you want to find winners (not necessarily those that will get you a win) attitude wise, you look to the defensive end. That is not to say that great offensive players don't want to win or put you in a position of winning, it is that the things required to be good defensively have a warrior mindset. High profile players are many times about "me" and obviously enough of them do win, but there is nothing wrong with having a few warriors on the team

I think overall, people on this forum have completely unrealistic expectations.

There are 8 teams in the country who currently have gone to the NCAA Tournament more than 5 years in a row. There's only 16 teams who have currently been to the NCAA Tournament more than 3 years in a row. There's a lot of "big names" that aren't on that list.

This notion you should be in it every year is just not realistic.