Anyone heard the odds and who is favored in the tournament. Does Purdue "USA" stand a chance? I have no clue what the other countries have compared to Canada.
Taipei
- Thread starter Boiler1313
- Start date
I've heard that Canada was one of the better teams in the tourney. I have no firsthand knowledge though.
I had heard the same, but wondered if they weren't playing us up to par, or we will be that good? I appreciate your response.
It's kind of hard to scout foreign college all-star teams. Purdue should have an advantage in team chemistry, while the other teams are probably more comfortable playing international rules and should be able to scout how Purdue plays easier. I like team USA's chances but off nights could hurt them. Let's hope they are on.
We can probably lose 1 in pool play and still make the medal round. By then we should have some scouting reports.
i have to say that the mighty boilers are probably the easiest team on earth to game plan for. at least they have been in previous seasons.
who knows this year? i expect more of the same. not that that is a bad thing.
Without knowing anything about the squads this year, I keep looking to 2015 for comparisons. I am expecting some very good teams and some not so competitive teams. As a reminder that '15-16 Kansas team went 33-5, won the Big 12 & Big 12 Tourney, was ranked between 1-7 in the nation all season, was the #1 overall seed in the NCAAT, and lost to eventual champ Villanova in E8. They added Nic Moore for the WUGs. Here is the margin of victory for their WUG games:
Canada (2 pre-trip exhibitions) - 8 pts, 9 pts
Turkey - 9
Brazil - 9
Chile - 65
Serbia - 1
Switzerland - 39
Lithuania - 22
Russia - 10
Germany - 7 (Double OT)
Canada (2 pre-trip exhibitions) - 8 pts, 9 pts
Turkey - 9
Brazil - 9
Chile - 65
Serbia - 1
Switzerland - 39
Lithuania - 22
Russia - 10
Germany - 7 (Double OT)
a question I have. because Purdue is an NCAA school, did they receive any practice restrictions or waivers about how much practice time they were allowed under NCAA rules ? and how much time their college athletes could spend practicing ?
as opposed to some of these other countries. Have some of these other countries been practicing year round for the past 2 years?
as opposed to some of these other countries. Have some of these other countries been practicing year round for the past 2 years?
I believe Purdue was granted about 30 practices over the summer. I am guessing that the thought process behind sending a whole team form the US was an attempt to send a group that was fimilure with each other bs an all star like team.
i have zero coaching experience.
the boilers play the same on D almost always. token pressure on the guy bringing the ball up and solid man D. seldom if ever press or heaven forbid a zone(not in favor of zone just saying) pretty easy to plan for
with the ball they walk it up the court taking 8-9 seconds of the possession. then pass it around the perimeter for 8-9 seconds with no one really trying to score. if they can't force it inside then you need to defend the perimeter for the remainder of the time. they never really try to score unless it goes inside to the big guy until late almost every possession. they do this on made baskets and most of the time when they get a rebound. they will fast break if you don't get back
they're not easy to beat as they're pretty good at what they do. just very easy to plan for.
solid but predictable
what am i missing
Apparently I'm missing something because I don't know why Purdue would be the easiest team to prepare for. They play the most versatile D that allows more flexibility and adjustment than any D (less predictability)...at least in theory. They play a motion offense or read offense more often than a set play making it too an offense that provides a variety of looks. Now the personnel do not change and they have the same habits, tendencies, strengths and weaknesses as the game before, but all teams have that.
They were the highest scoring team in the B1G last year, so they weren't using the whole shot clock as often as you are making it seem.
A bulldozer is predictable, but hard to stop. Our team values the ball, and attempts to make the most from every possession. Predictable? Maybe the first two passes. After that, we become very opportunistic, often with the ball in the paint by then. It is not the Tom Crean pass-it-around-the-outside-and-jack-one-up offense.
We probe and poke looking for a weakness. A missed assignment, somebody out of position, slow to close out on a shooter. We are extremely difficult to prepare for, because every player has to be in the right place almost every minute of playing defense against us. It is wearing, and we often see opposition guards break down near the end of games. Each possesion might look the same at the start, but in reality, we are extremely difficult to coach against.
Last edited:
A very good and easy to understand description of IU' O the last few years.
they are hard to stop. they do score a lot. they do play good d. they are B1G champs
2-3 guys each half court possession will not shoot it or try to score if left completely unguarded from 15-18 feet unless the shot clock is winding down.
they do play very good d but never press or change it up until late and behind.
i'm not saying what they do is a bad thing. just predictable. they
execute it the way painter wants it and have some success
Last edited:
I understand what you are saying. Consider the following: Every player has different strengths and all players cannot occupy the same location or general area. Needing different skillsets provides a variety of options to a variety of situations or different skill sets to align with the different type of opportunites. The variety or specialty of skills of varying strengths implies some things are a go for some players and a no for others...DEPENDING on what is offered (read offense). Truncating the potential data by aligning what each player does best cuts down the variability of outcomes to a higher level of success as a result of increasing the predictability of what certain players might do on the offensive side of the ball.
In a sense the same thing is done on defense. By reducing the area of the court coverage to defending an area that the offense scores at a higher rate you might be more predictable in your defense, but also more effective in stopping an easy basket.
There are MANY nuances a coach can do offensively and especially defensively in motion and man from game to game and throughout the game...many possibly obscure to many. Think of it like this as well...there are an infinite number of ways to get a wrong answer, but a finite number of ways to get the right number.
I have no problem with a very short term press from time to time, but the reality is that when two good teams play each other ...the game is decided more in the half court. Presses beat poor teams badly, but allow easy scoring opportunities for good teams. If you are talking about trying to build a championship team...you will have the personnel that a press will do nothing and if it does...you don't have the talent to be really good anyway.
Another video from the trip. After watching this it reinforces what we've heard recently about finding the right kids for the team at Purdue. They honestly look like they enjoy hanging out together, which can't be said for all teams.
I hope they have a wonderful season, but I really appreciate the quality of individual that puts a face on Purdue. People may debate what Matt does or doesn't do, what effect he has on recruiting, his staff or anything relative to the game itself, but there can be no debate that he is trying to get winners in life and just kids we would all be proud to call our own.
Yeah, Painter wants to wear down the other team team by making them defend long possessions and pound it into the post. But there have always been a percentage of plays that go against that tendency. That was Carsen's primary role last year. Some people claim that he's playing outside the system when he shoots at the first opportunity, but I don't think so. There always seems to be a player who gets lots of minutes and takes a certain amount of quick shots per game. Fast paced offense isn't the identity of Purdue but it is mixed in enough that teams should be defending for whole possessions.
i don't think wearing down a team takes place in a 30 second or 24 second clock like before without a clock or a 45 second clock. Crean had a world of talent and it was shoot whenever on that team that led to him losing his job. It is more about shifting the D and making the other team hold focus on D. I don't think Matt has a problem thowing it to someone for a gimme basket in the first few seconds of a game unless running the clock out ensures a victory. Matt wants to score the most effective manner possible and his offense normally bears that out. Moving on O with ball and player should move the D which can open up things and defiitely make offensive rebounding more likely. I think you are judging Purdue under the Matt, the same whether he has AJ, Biggie and Hass versus the teams without a key inside player.
With Haas..with Biggie...with AJ, do you really want a player to not have a priority through them with their effectiveness in scoring? Now if Matt lands a dominate 5 or 4 years from now I imagine we will see that dominant player dominate the attention of the offense and if a 3 is the dominate player..that three will dominate the offensive attention. This was discussed a few weeks ago by Wol?? and a few others like myself suggested it was more about where the talent was..I mean Matt wants to win and will win however...but he plays the odds a lot...
You missed actually watching this team play before you posted an analysis of how they play.
What makes the offense unpredictable is that Purdue runs a read offense which depends on intelligent players making good decisions. The result is that no two plays look the same. As the opposing defense adjusts, the offense automatically adjusts. Having shooting threats at every position helps tremendously, because Purdue can attack with any player, depending on what the defense gives.
A few years ago, Purdue's offense was much more predictable because the players weren't nearly as adept at reading and adjusting to the weaknesses of the defense, but the current group is great at it, as were the Baby Boilers.
These elementary kids must be balling out
Brother in law works in Taiwan and has tix to the first game. Expecting feedback from him as things progress.
I always find it odd when people use descriptive terms to talk about how fast or slow a team likes to play when we now have exact statistical measurements for this sort of thing.
Last season Purdue ranked 111th out of 350+ teams in terms of adjusted tempo (accounting for opponents tempo). So they were slightly faster than your average team. In the Big Ten they ranked 4th out of 14 teams in terms of tempo. Their average possession on offense was 90th in terms of time til a shot attempt (16.6 seconds) and their average possessions on defense was 264th in time til a shot attempt (17.7 seconds).
Last season Purdue ranked 111th out of 350+ teams in terms of adjusted tempo (accounting for opponents tempo). So they were slightly faster than your average team. In the Big Ten they ranked 4th out of 14 teams in terms of tempo. Their average possession on offense was 90th in terms of time til a shot attempt (16.6 seconds) and their average possessions on defense was 264th in time til a shot attempt (17.7 seconds).
Similar threads
