Scrimmage 10/24
- Thread starter Beeazlebub
- Start date
If I understand your comment you are saying to funnel the players to the inside and towards AJ? That is not a common approach, but has been used before. Purdue typically forces baseline to cut the court in half and hinder ball reversal while using the out of bounds lines as well. However, you play and try to force a player any direction it requires overplay to some degree and being quick enough to maintain it. Were you suggesting funneling the player into the middle of the court or did I misunderstand you? If you overplay or force a player any direction and he gets ONE step on you and a shoulder past you ...you are now behind him and can't do a thing to control the offensive player. If you were not suggesting what I was commenting on, try again because everyone I'm aware forces to some degree some direction..whether a half a body +/- some amount. to not force "some" direction is to give the total advantage to the offensive player and places the defensive player always behind since he is in a reaction mode. Force inside, force baseline, force weak hand...whatever a player must overplay something in line with the team approach else there really isn't any defense.
I believe he was also including the shoulder injury that lingered on into his freshman year, back when he hurt it in high school. So both year's now he hasn't been fully healthy.
the general rule typically is on a direct line from the ball to your player you are about 1 step towards the ball IF your player is 1 pass away. If your player is more than a single pass, then you are in help D. Naturally, on skip passes you don't want to get screened in or in a position to get screen if your player cuts to a different location and he is a scorer you are not to help off much. Back in the 70's Fred Shaus wanted a step in the lane in help. All rules are adjusted for the players involved, but generally all coaches want pressure on the ball, pressure on the person capable of getting it passed to them and help if more than a pass away. I know I'm not telling you anything new, but there are different level of fans that might be unaware...
Dakota is cerebral and skilled, but Matt says the Purdue fans haven't got to see what he can do yet!
Stat line said 5/12 of the 3 and 0/2 on the others. Kendall has enough length he doesn't needs as much help as Dakota and Ryan. Given the same circumstances of good screens and proper timing I think Ryan and Dakota benefit "MORE" than Kendall as I think they need more time. Timing will dramatically improve over the course of the season and THAT I believe will benefit Ryan more than Kendall. They all benefit, but I think there is more growth for Ryan with a little more time to shoot...same with Dakota
I cringe just about every time Stephens dribbles. I don't think that is a reason to play him above anyone else. And while he might block a few more shots, he also seems to have some really careless turnovers and his good shooting games seem to come most often against the weakest teams on the schedule.
If I were Painter, they would all play this season. If someone wants to redshirt, all 3 should be on the team again next year so if you decide you don't need Cline this year because Stephens and Mathias fill that role capably then you could redshirt him next year with having seen that already play out.
BTW I would also have Smotherman play this season. He probably won't have as big of a role as he wants this season but he is probably the best athlete on the team and he could help win a game or two at some point. IMO it's all hands on deck this year and you put all your resources towards making this a great season. If I didn't think there were much of a chance that someone could help this year I might see some sense in redshirting them but I can envision both Cline and Smotherman helping us win games.
Not sure what you mean by this. Are you saying Kendall gets his shot off quicker than Cline? I'm not choosing sides here (Kendall vs Cline) by any stretch. Love em both. I do want to point out that Cline has a hair-trigger release. He gets is shot off as fast as anyone on the team. I just want all of em he launches - and kendall - to go IN!
I fear the fatigue of freshmen on D showing up in shooting as the season goes on. Ryan does have a fairly quick release, but he doesn't have the length of Kendall and I wouldn't classify him as a great athlete that gets a lot of lift from his legs. Consequently I think he needs a little more time. Matt Waddell needed a "little" more time...so did ZO. I do think Ryan has better mechanics in the little I've seen than Kendall and with sufficient time could be the better shooter. I think Kendall maybe has farther range and can shoot over more players not requiring the time. The reality is I know Kendall has been very streaky in the past and I think he over strides and has his guide hand too much on top of the ball, but I've seen so little of Ryan I'm making a lot of judgments in what little I've seen, tempered with what freshmen seem to require as well. Like you I'm glad Purdue has them all and don't know why Matt never had more shooters before...
No way CMP is going to redshirt Cline, Stephens or Mathias. This is probably going to be CMPs best team and who knows if CS is going to be hear next year. You have to go for it this year. All of the shooters are going to play. I'm not sure we should even RS Basil anymore. I think he will be able to contribute and I'd like to have the depth.
Sounds like it is Basil's call. Like having all three shooters, but fully understand Basil wanting another year. Great athlete at 6'6"...improve his ball handling and shooting and he has a great future. Certainly he could help Purdue this year, but I think he helps Purdue more playing another year.
His points came off of intentional fouls Painter was practicing last minute drills at the end of each segment so somewhat deceiving from the points stats . A lot of hype about him running the point not really warranted IMO . PJ applied pressure and he was able to pass the ball ahead to a wide open guard who wasn't pressured . I wasn't really aware of him at all but like most I was there to see Swanigan and Cline . Vince made you aware of what he was doing as did Kendall . Also the last two minutes of each scrimmage was about running sets and such , more of a structured practice not about winning or losing . I am surprised that who won and who lost is even mentioned didn't seem to be a issue at the time . As they would stand and run out the clock with 30 seconds or less remaining after they had ran their sets at both ends . I would be shocked if anyone who was there cared who won or lost weather they were on the court or in the stands .
This is directed towards anyone that was there: how did Davis look shooting-wise and overall offensively?
I believe if he has improved and is a more consistent mid-range and perimeter shooter, that he will be getting more minutes at the 2 than Stephens, Mathias, or Cline. Davis brings something to the 2 guard position that those three don't: he can continually get to the rim and make plays that way.
I believe if he has improved and is a more consistent mid-range and perimeter shooter, that he will be getting more minutes at the 2 than Stephens, Mathias, or Cline. Davis brings something to the 2 guard position that those three don't: he can continually get to the rim and make plays that way.
i "think" he nailed two threes early...first session and not sure after that. i do think he has improved his stroke and could be an okay shooter. He is holding his follow through as are some others now... Better check the stats...5/10 overall and 2/2 from the three...
Totally agree re Cline. Posted on KHC that he has a much higher bball IQ than Kendall. I've been a big Kendall fan but am tired of him pouting and appearing to feel sorry for himself.
As mentioned Davis didn't shoot a lot but when he did it looked smooth. Overall I was pleased with what I saw. It's hard to judge too much because everyone knows the other person so well in a scrimmage. With that said here are my takes from Saturday:
Caleb looks like a different person from when I saw him last year at Homestead. He is much leaner and seems to have a much quicker first step. He will have those freshman moments where we all cringe but he is going to be a great asset this year.
Vince looks very good. I'm biased as he is my favorite player, but anybody who appreciates an all around player has to love this guy. Appears to be more explosive (had one very nice throw down on a fast break).
Isaac looked more agile to me. It's hard when you are as big as he is but I thought he got up and down the floor better and was establishing good position down low.
Ryan - Matt, please don't RS him! He obviously has work to do but this could be a very special year and we need shooters. We are going to see a ton of zone defense and if Dakota or Kendall are off Ryan could be the answer. I watched him off the ball and he works very hard to get open.
The person I wanted to see most (Hill) wasn't there because of a class conflict. I will put on my homer hat now and say that I think that is great. While I was disappointed to not see him play I love the fact that his class came first. That would not happen everywhere. I'm stepping off my soap box now.
For everyone talking about red shirting who....remember, a red shirt can always be pulled at any time during the season. I don't think it's a bad thing to redshirt either Basil or Cline OR both...but if injury or poor play requires, you play them given the right set of circumstances.
At some point during the season, there becomes a "point of no return" which wouldn't be fair to the player to pull the red shirt. We also probably won't know if we need someone until the league games begin & at that point, I think we are past the point of no return.
Even though these have just been scrimmages and it's a small sample size, that's encouraging to know. I want to believe that Stephens and Mathias are going to be these amazing shooters at the 2 but until we see it consistently I just think it's more likely that they will be streaky. With that in mind, I just think Davis can be more of an overall threat at the 2 if he improves in the aforementioned areas.
I think the last half of the season last year Ray became someone you had to guard out to the line..not heavy pressure, but an awareness that he was capable if left completely open to shoot. His first choice was NOT the three and opposition knew that...but they also found out he intended to keep them somewhat honest and could when left to shoot ...hit it.
One does not need to funnel a player inside. There is a strong side for the defense and a weak side. Good players understand this and will force a player who is trying to attack the weak side out of his preferred path and into the help side of the defense.
Help side defense relies on positioning and rotations according to where the ball is on the floor. One pass away, two passes away etc. Good defenders cheat to the weak side and protect the rim from all spots on the floor. They also rely on their help side to help protect the rim as it is the responsibility of each player according to where the ball is on the floor. Sometimes that means keeping the ball away from good shooters on the perimeter.
With teams like IU we may try to entice a drive to the basket as they are more focused on scoring three pointers then drives. This is how they win games. By making 3 instead of two. We aren't going to give away a basket. By if you take away the three enough when playing a team like that, it could be the difference of losing by 4 or winning by 1 in just a few possessions. Last year the game at IU was a perfect example of this. Had we not held them to such a low percentage on the long ball, we would have lost. The difference is that we allowed Williams to get the ball on the perimeter and denied the rest of the team that opportunity whenever possible. Watch the game again and you will see that we played the slits we knew they were trying to set up at and preferred them to drive instead. It may seem we funneled them at AJ, but that wasn't the case. AJ just happened to be there due to positioning and did a good job of knowing when to try to block the shot and when to simply alter it. The key here is you want to take away what the other team is trying to do. In the case of IU, it is get long ball shots from driving and collapsing the defense and hitting one of their open shooters. We stayed home and fixed thier drivers to make a bad pass or try to shoot over AJ. It worked quite well as every game after the first game at Purdue, teams did the same and they lost most of those games even when shooting above 40% from 3. They made a good percentage but didn't take as many shits as they preferred from long range.
I highly doubt we teach players to funnel the offense towards the middle or towards the basket. That would be silly as it would put our defense at a disadvantage.
You are reading too much peegs if you think we funnel players at AJ hoping for a block. We want to protect AJ not force him to make a split second decision.
That's sounds a lot like Snu claiming Bryant is going to make them a better team because he will protect the rim. Having Bryant clean up their bad defensive positioning is exactly what we want to do.
Btw. Your om peegs claiming to go there to discuss IU and only IU after starting a second thread about Biggie on their site just a few days ago.
Alrhough I have no clue what your intentions are. It makes us all look kind of stupid as they see one doing it and judge us all by it. I know Snu is annoying. But you needn't make up stuff to make him look dumb. Just let him babble on about how Bryant will force us to guard the post and let him hang himself with preseason Kenpom "stats" and the such.
Last edited:
What you typed has nothing to do with what I typed. Nobody said Purdue wants to funnel players in, but coaches have in the past. Different players will have different approaches applied to them. Nothing new there either. Gonna have to see what got you worked up on peeps. Duplicate posts? Damn, now I won't sleep
What I can see on Peegs is that I started a thread concerning Swanigan on Wednesday at 10:19 AM and the "biggies" thread was started at 10:31 or 12 minutes later. I don't care, but stating to wonder if you have me confused with someone else. FWIW I neither need nor seek approval from anything I write. My ego is not that fragile. If people agree with me, fine... and if not that is okay. I don't need my ego stroke in any sense nor interested in a popularity contest.
I think this started with you thinking that Davis a good off ball defender who has defended 2, 3 and 4's would be a good defender on the ball or 1 primarily. I think this came about due to your interest in Dakota playing the 1 offensively and having someone else guard the 1, but that has been lost in the shuffle That is not to say that against certain teams that wouldn't work, but with all the stats Davis had in high school, the knock against him was his lack of quickness. That is his Achilles Heel as we all know the leadership and effort he has put in.
Never did I say Purdue should funnel teams into the lane. I said I've seen other coaches do that,,,for a variety of reasons. Nor is ball side and primary rotations and secondary rotations a new concept to me. That is something all coaches teach although it is going on 20 years since I did any instruction..
I'm not sure what got you ruffled up. However, if you are concerned with some posters on Peegs defining you, then you must not have enough real issues in life to keep your attention. Shoot, I was on there before Mike sold it to Rivals many years ago. It concerns me none whether people think my comments are worthy or not. Here is what you will learn someday....a few thousand people watch a basketball game and there are a few thousand different thoughts on the game. In there might be a few that have instructed and have more knowledge in the relevant domain, but that doesn't mean that others couldn't have a point. Some will like what I write and some will not. I'm fine with that. It is not that I only got interested in basketball in the last 30 years or so and need approval.
I don't think anyone attempted to insult anyone else from what I could read of the posts in question. It's tough to know who is responding to who sometimes. At times it is a fractious board over there.
It gets confusing after a while, over there. You guys might be shooting at the wrong targets. When some of the less mature posters see that you have a GBI registration, they get all hostile. I happen to be an IU fan as well as a Purdue fan. I try to balance my postings in both places. Sometimes I can't recall what I post one place or the other.
Heck, SNU keeps posting stuff about Purdue over on Peegs. I even called him out for it. I was posting to a thread about IU's roster, and how they would use their bench - nothing Purdue related. SNU decided to continue some sort of long running argument I've had with him in the middle of the thread on IU. I continued with my posts, focusing on IU and did not rise to his bait, and he posted a second time about Purdue, for which I finally called him out.
It gets confusing after a while, over there. You guys might be shooting at the wrong targets. When some of the less mature posters see that you have a GBI registration, they get all hostile. I happen to be an IU fan as well as a Purdue fan. I try to balance my postings in both places. Sometimes I can't recall what I post one place or the other.
Heck, SNU keeps posting stuff about Purdue over on Peegs. I even called him out for it. I was posting to a thread about IU's roster, and how they would use their bench - nothing Purdue related. SNU decided to continue some sort of long running argument I've had with him in the middle of the thread on IU. I continued with my posts, focusing on IU and did not rise to his bait, and he posted a second time about Purdue, for which I finally called him out.
O
I don't care if you thread was first of second. You posted it on their board. But I do know last night you claimed to onmy go there to discuss IU basketball. Well if that was true. You would have never started a thread about Purdue. It wasn't hard to see you weren't being genuine unless of course there are two of you out there. It doesn't bother me. Do as you please. It did make you look silly and I thought that before you claimed to only discuss IU when there. Refuting a post there and starting one there are two completely different things. I don't care what they think of any of us. I am pretty sure I already know. But I do care when IU fans come here and post threads about IU on our board. Same goes for MSU. Your thread just gives them more reason and almost taunts them to do the same. It's not smart.
As for funneling toward the middle. You assumed that was what I meant and although we do that in certain instances due to positioning, I doubt any coach teaches to funnel the ball handler towards the basket.
Thanks for letting me know what I may learn someday. I in fact and probably as old as you and have also been around since the inception of forums. I have had the same handle all the way back to the days of calling Gojko out on the star forums in the '90's. I also agree that those who haven't coached can be as knowledgable as many who have. I know some coaches that have no clue how to teach help defense and Crean has proven that some of them make it into D1 basketball.
I'm not Ruffles up. I just think you are trying to hard to convince the unconvincingly that you are right. It makes no sense to me as they come here and read what you posted there along with anything else that intrigues them. But have at it. If you want to make yourself look foolish by trying to make yourself look knowledgable, I have no issue with that. Just wanted to do as you were doing and pass on a little friendly advice.
have never said I wanted Dakota at point. I wouldn't mind it. But I prefer Edwards and Davis bringing the ball up together and which ever one gets a taller player who shouldn't be as quick, can be the primary ball handler. I prefer we force other teams attempt to match up to us not the other way around. But I also need to see what Hill can do and may have no issue with him at point if he has the IQ to protect the ball.
I don't care if you thread was first of second. You posted it on their board. But I do know last night you claimed to onmy go there to discuss IU basketball. Well if that was true. You would have never started a thread about Purdue. It wasn't hard to see you weren't being genuine unless of course there are two of you out there. It doesn't bother me. Do as you please. It did make you look silly and I thought that before you claimed to only discuss IU when there. Refuting a post there and starting one there are two completely different things. I don't care what they think of any of us. I am pretty sure I already know. But I do care when IU fans come here and post threads about IU on our board. Same goes for MSU. Your thread just gives them more reason and almost taunts them to do the same. It's not smart.
As for funneling toward the middle. You assumed that was what I meant and although we do that in certain instances due to positioning, I doubt any coach teaches to funnel the ball handler towards the basket.
Thanks for letting me know what I may learn someday. I in fact and probably as old as you and have also been around since the inception of forums. I have had the same handle all the way back to the days of calling Gojko out on the star forums in the '90's. I also agree that those who haven't coached can be as knowledgable as many who have. I know some coaches that have no clue how to teach help defense and Crean has proven that some of them make it into D1 basketball.
I'm not Ruffles up. I just think you are trying to hard to convince the unconvincingly that you are right. It makes no sense to me as they come here and read what you posted there along with anything else that intrigues them. But have at it. If you want to make yourself look foolish by trying to make yourself look knowledgable, I have no issue with that. Just wanted to do as you were doing and pass on a little friendly advice.
I have no idea what you are saying? It was first, not second as you claimed.
"I don't care if you thread was first of second. You posted it on their board. But I do know last night you claimed to onmy go there to discuss IU basketball. Well if that was true. You would have never started a thread about Purdue. It wasn't hard to see you weren't being genuine unless of course there are two of you out there. It doesn't bother me. Do as you please. It did make you look silly and I thought that before you claimed to only discuss IU when there. Refuting a post there and starting one there are two completely different things. I don't care what they think of any of us. I am pretty sure I already know. But I do care when IU fans come here and post threads about IU on our board. Same goes for MSU. Your thread just gives them more reason and almost taunts them to do the same. It's not smart. "
What does that mean? Is your issue that I posted on Peegs the article about Swanigan? Is that what you are saying? If so, yes, there were many and one in particular that wondered how he got to Purdue. One very frequent poster knows very well my nephew an AD and I'm sure knows something about me and basketball as a result.. Is that what you are trying to say...that I shouldn't answer something on an IU forum about Purdue???? I'm not sure I ever claimed to discuss IU basketball on the Peegs forum...I have, but not sure I ever claimed to do that...or only that? If there is one thing people would describe about me whether previous coaching or just living it is that I rarely give a rip what people think of me. As long as I pass the mirror test, that is sufficient.
This all gets so confusing...
"I just think you are trying to hard to convince the unconvincingly that you are right. It makes no sense to me as they come here and read what you posted there along with anything else that intrigues them."
Look, I color outside the lines a lot. I'm not fond of goose stepping to someone's beat. If the above bothers you and you fear that Peegs fans may not like me...that is fine. It doesn't matter to me what they think as I have no image at stake. I'm honest and not afraid to exchange the nuances of basketball with people on either forum. Why would I think that someone's opinion on either forum of me as a result of something I wrote would somehow make me insecure? I don't get it. BTW Gojko is a FB friend of mine...does that disqualify me for something? Nothing specific (other than Swanigan) was mentioned and so it is all so confusing what you are suggesting?????
I don't think anyone attempted to insult anyone else from what I could read of the posts in question. It's tough to know who is responding to who sometimes. At times it is a fractious board over there.
It gets confusing after a while, over there. You guys might be shooting at the wrong targets. When some of the less mature posters see that you have a GBI registration, they get all hostile. I happen to be an IU fan as well as a Purdue fan. I try to balance my postings in both places. Sometimes I can't recall what I post one place or the other.
Heck, SNU keeps posting stuff about Purdue over on Peegs. I even called him out for it. I was posting to a thread about IU's roster, and how they would use their bench - nothing Purdue related. SNU decided to continue some sort of long running argument I've had with him in the middle of the thread on IU. I continued with my posts, focusing on IU and did not rise to his bait, and he posted a second time about Purdue, for which I finally called him out.
Is there a link at Peegs I should read that maybe proudopete is trying to refer? He has lost me completely on what he is saying?
He said, "But I do know last night you claimed to onmy go there to discuss IU basketball." and I really don't understand what he is getting at or is so concerned. The effort to answer him, not knowing what he is asking is about to the point of marking it up as a lost cause. He is passionate about something, but I don't know what to tell him...since I really don't know his concerns...
Okay, Tom. If you want to start threads on peegs about Purdue. I don't have an issue with that. It does seem silly to me when you could have just put the link in one of the numerous biggie threads already there and it would have bumped it to the top. It in my opinion just invited them to start IU threads here and I'm pretty sure most here don't want that. I call truce.
Now let's discuss basketball.
You were at the scrimmage. I see on another site where people discuss the possibility of Cline playing some point guard to give us another shooter on the floor. I know he is more athletic and stronger then he looks. What are your thoughts on him picking up minutes off the bench in their role?
tjreese - Don't worry about what proudopete says. You can't please everyone. Just keep posting because I really appreciate your insights and analysis and I'm sure that I am not alone.
thank you! NOW I know exactly what you were referencing. I get in these forums and get out quickly and I know I miss many things. Most of my posts are very quick and unaware of everything going on. I have no desire to create attention to myself...I get enough without trying. I got to be honest. I've scouted teams and tried to pick up particular player tendencies in the past only to find out that teh next game was unlike what I saw previously. I fear streaky shooting by Kendall and unsure about Dakota's health. I want him available as a shooter and to not redshirt...ONLY due to those two having some issues. It would be best for him to redshirt though.
My memory is a little faded, but seem to recall him stroking it as a youngster at Marion when Carmel played Bryson and Brandon Scott. I'm really reluctant to talk about him as a PG, because that was not my interest when I went to the scrimmage. The video in high school has shown him to be capable of getting the ball up the court. I also seem to recall a little point guard at Homestead that I thought gave him some problems with his quickness in the championship. Davis was on record the first practice introducing him to Purdue defense and made a comment that he knew he never got a shot off and not sure he dribbled the ball.
I think more than anything his ability to run the point at this stage is a function of the defense played against him. I think he would do fine against a pure zone and match-up zone. I don't know if that would be the case with an athletic guard hounding him. Depending on teams trapping him ...again I think it is a matter of whether the team is athletic and using their athleticism as opposed athletic and not making athleticism a major factor. Cline appears to be a very smart player, played in a very successful program and is cerebral enough to handle things...it is the physical maturity of the opposing teams athletes that would concern me...but generally PG at Purdue has been a tough job. I wanted to see Hill and I never got to see him. So, I guess all that is a function of the team Purdue is playing and the defensive capabilities of that team...same with Dakota, but another year of maturity and possibly a little slower?
Thank you! I think there was just a misunderstanding and hopefully that is in the past.
Yeah. It was never something I considered as I see Edwards as a good option to create mismatches at times.
But it has intrigued my curiousity ans I will be watching his handle and vision much closer now.
Like I said before. I like Edwards in that role with him and Ray taking the ball out and whoever draws the slowest player brings it up.
I am wait and see on Hill as well. With the options we have and the numerous players who can play several positions. Hill will need to be at least one of the following three options. He will need to be an excellent ball handler with few turnovers, a decent enough scorer to keep teams from sagging off of him, or a lock down defender.
If he isn't one of the three, I think we are better off going with someone who is.
I'm not worried about man defense in bringing the ball up, because as you say Purdue has enough players that one of the players on Purdue will have the advantage. I could see a run and jump possibly causing problems. Any straight up man can be broken by clearing the help defense and allowing the Purdue player with the advantage to bring it up. Do you remember Cornbread Maxwell and North Carolina Charlotte with Lee Rose before Purdue? http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/18/sports/ncaabasketball/18charlotte.html?pagewanted=print&_r=0 Cornbread brought it up. However, when the other team says I'm not going to match you man to man and goes zone press or trap then they take that advantage of location on the court with their players against whatever you decide to place in various areas of the court. As in any zone, spacing, finding the gaps and getting it inside and being aware of the opposite side and 45 degree angles always helps. Purdue, maybe a little slow afoot has good passers, cerebral and enough height to be able to go over the top as well. I worry about change ups in defense and Purdue being the cerebral team having enough time to probe inside out with the clock left due to pressure applied in full and 3/4 court. Straight up man pressure I don't think will be a problem for Purdue
He may be referring to the fact that Stephens started at Purdue recovering from shoulder surgery.
Stephens is the 2 guard that has all the tools to be an all big player on our roster. No way he falls out of the rotation. He could be possibly be our leading scorer his senior year(a little far stretched). He will demand at least 15 minutes this season. Dakota will be similar. With these two likely coming off the bench how can Painter possibly find minutes for Ryan?
I think reasonable fans are on the same page... I've never heard Painter mention a redshirt of Dakota or Stephens.
I thought I read somewhere that we can't redshirt Taylor. Wasn't last year a medical? If so, it seems we'd still be able to redshirt him this year.
I don't think Taylor would be guaranteed a 6th year of eligibility (i.e. be able to play 4 seasons) if he were to somehow be redshirted again this season.
Similar threads
