Rebounding, Rebounding, Rebounding
- Thread starter BoilerInChiTown
- Start date
Not that I disagree with the general point, but, how do they suddenly improve? They are who/what they are, and, they are a team that is not a good rebounding team and is not going to be a good rebounding team. This has been an issue that has plagued a lot of Purdue teams for that matter, not just this one...but, it has kept a lot of other Purdue teams from not having the success that it might have otherwise, and it stands to be the same for/with this edition as well unfortunately...it certainly was today.
This. Rebounding is going to be a weakness at times for this team. That is on the scouting report. At some point your strengths just have to overcome your weaknesses. The poor shooting and some of the decision making was more surprising than the offensive rebounds.
I typically don’t get on players but Haas played like ass today. He shrinks in games when teams swarm him. Yes I know there were quite a few no calls were he was hit. But he has got to play better than he did today.
Tend to agree with FDB....the lack of patience/discipline with some shot selections and 18 turnovers (many of which were unforced) were disappointing. The Boilers did a better job on the glass in the second half, but still got hurt. I'd also like to see what Nojel Eastern can do on defense down the stretch.
So.....although I don't see this necessarily as a season-defining game, it's a disappointing set-back, especially with the way it shook out and the likelihood of now not getting opportunities to play the top teams in this field. Now, on the bright side, Purdue battled with perhaps a better team than people thought.....made plenty of mistakes and still had several chances to still win....I can't seem to throw away my Black & Gold shades.
Credit to the Volunteers....they played tough and made more plays. These are the types of games to find a way to finish.....on to the next.
the rebounding is one thing but if you hit the shots you have been hitting in previous games, the rebounds arent that meaningful. 8-30 by the edwards boys is what cost us the game
Let's break this down a bit. Purdue with motion and a read offense will "lean" to more skillful players than athletic players. This group of players may never be a "good" rebounding team on LONG rebounds, but THAT wasn't the case today. Purdue was in a battle like the 70s, 80s, 90s and early 2000s...this was a battle in the paint and that battle was lost due to short rebounds rather than long rebounds. Purdue like the WUG got pinned in too deep (are they not physical enough BEFORE the shot in holding position earlier?) and gave up short boards. Purdue never had the horses to battle inside and were basically beat up inside physically. People are concerned that playing two bigs at times would stagnant the O, but is that a roll of the dice when your D is giving up baskets two feet away all game? Perhaps Taylor couldn't go that game adn you were fearful for depth...okay, but in the final minutes foul trouble was not in play. If Purdue cannot play with two bigs...what do they do when they play a physical team, teh refs let physical play happen on the boards and you are struggling on the perimeter? What does Purdue do when they play the bigs of Purdue straight up so they can guard the perimeter players of Purdue...have a result like Kansas...Louisville...Tennessee? How does Purdue shore up this Achilles Heel if they don't develop it for at least a fwe possessions?
The biggest problem in my mind at least though is your final one...these are the types of games that Purdue all too often has failed to find a way to finish, and, far too often it happens when there is no "next" to move on to...it is precisely the type of game that Purdue loses that it should not when it matters most.
It is not a season-defining game by any means...not at this point...but, it was so similar to so many others before it that it is sort of part of the program's nature almost at this point seemingly...they simply lose to teams that are athletic and physically tough, at least way more often than they do not.
It is not a "bright spot" that Purdue battled a team that may be better than people thought, as Purdue lost to a team that it was clearly better than...simply because the other team outplayed them..out worked them...out hustled them...and, in the end, out executed them.
That was a game that Purdue absolutely should have won...and, it is absolutely the kind of game that sticks not only with them, but, sticks for sure in the mind of those that do not follow Purdue as closely as we all do. Purdue is really good generally against the Fairfields of the world...not so much against even the most marginally of good teams...and definitely not against the genuinely great/best teams (think Kansas last March).
Hopefully Painter has them doing rebounding drills for a week straight.
Izzo teams would never get out rebounded like this.
Why?
I don't know.
Get some rebounding drills from izzo.
Izzo teams would never get out rebounded like this.
Why?
I don't know.
Get some rebounding drills from izzo.
I hear what you're saying DG10....but some of this could be a self-fulfilling prophecy too. Yes, the chances are if the same things keep happening maybe it's going to continue to happen. And I don't totally disagree with your premise, but I guess I'm at least suggesting maybe the players can grow from this.....though, yeah it's frustrating to watch it. I still like this team's chances to have a really good season. They definitely need to fight to be mentally tougher.....lapses today for sure....they don't have to accept that it will be that way the next time, but I get why people won't count on that either.
We'll agree to disagree.....just trying to find any positives (which is difficult after a tough loss like this one).
TJ you nailed it. Athletic teams jumped over our backs. When it happens against our forwards the refs call it. Matt should alert this happens to our big men. They continually get hit in the head and rake their arms. Haas finally had enough and pulled down a man sized rebound and was called for a foul??????? Matt then pulls him????? Instead Matt should have been all over the refs and insert Haarms at forward and together they can clear space until the refs either let both teams play or start calling it.
They play physical and we play small. For spurts at least 10 minutes during the game we should have had Vincent on the Admiral and Haarms on Williams with Haas helping keep them outside. TN had the perfect lineup for us to use the twin towers. We need to do this against the elite teams.
BTW, the first play two plays Haas sets up down low and gets a lay up and passes out to Carson for the 3. Why did we go away from that. Harms could definitely feed Haas down low. Instead we bring Haas out and feed him away from the basket. Why was that?
They play physical and we play small. For spurts at least 10 minutes during the game we should have had Vincent on the Admiral and Haarms on Williams with Haas helping keep them outside. TN had the perfect lineup for us to use the twin towers. We need to do this against the elite teams.
BTW, the first play two plays Haas sets up down low and gets a lay up and passes out to Carson for the 3. Why did we go away from that. Harms could definitely feed Haas down low. Instead we bring Haas out and feed him away from the basket. Why was that?
Last edited:
I'm not suggesting this is THE ANSWER, but you are right, they are who they are, therefore, the only way to change is to CHANGE ... change who they are by playing different people. And for sure those different people have weaknesses too.
I underrstand what your premise is, but in that case, we lose every game when the Edwards aren't hitting. We can't just play on accepting that as an outcome to those games.
Purdue is its own worst enemy a lot of the time...far too often for that matter.
I don't know why things happened, but when they are only essentially scoring two feet away and we have bigs that don't have to move too far...I would have preferred a few possessions to see how it goes. Maybe the offense gets sluggish...was it sharp??? Maybe it doesn't work? I just think their close shots in the paint were an invitation to do battle in the paint
I saw enough of his defense or lack of earlier in the game.
We will have a good season because the Big Ten really really sucks this year. You have two teams that might be able to compete with the big boys that would be Michigan State and Minnesota. Michigan State showed that they can compete with the big boys verdict still out on Minnesota. The best I see Purdue doing this year is maybe a sweet 16 with 20 plus wins. At least Purdue is consistent
When it comes to rebounding, unfortunately for Purdue I'm not so sure that it is a taught skill. I'm sure Purdue players has participated in many a rebounding drill whether high school or with Painter's staff. However, if a player does not have the will and the heart to rebound, it is not going to happen.
Also, Vince Edwards did not come to play today. At this stage, being his senior year Vince needs to be at least an 18 and 6 or 18 and 8 type of player. He does not seem to have the speed to blow by folks off the drive. The Tennessee player backed him down in the lane several times and scored so easily.
Also, Vince Edwards did not come to play today. At this stage, being his senior year Vince needs to be at least an 18 and 6 or 18 and 8 type of player. He does not seem to have the speed to blow by folks off the drive. The Tennessee player backed him down in the lane several times and scored so easily.
Looking at the stats I don’t see a huge difference in rebounds but I do see that two of our starters went 8-30 from the field, defensive management overplaying the 3 point line and blowing a 5 point lead in OVT led to the loss. Tenn proved today that they too are a top 20 team with their loss to Villanova so if we win today chalk it up to a learning experience, IMO.
Similar threads
