Don't get why some of our guys don't foul out guarding the other teams best shooter. They should be on him like white on rice. Look how others play loyer, that is how we should be handling someone like Tominaga or Buie.
The biggest concern and potential fatal flaw
- Thread starter IowaMuse
- Start date
Actually thought Purdue did a halfway decent job on Tominga in H2 after a poor H1. Heide provided some of that. Trouble is other guys had a big H2.
But they would have beaten us even with an average showing. Purdue just didn't show up offensively ready to play. And were there normal sub average defensively.
Last edited:
I fully understand your thoughts. However, when you say, "IMO, he's not getting any better by sitting on the bench." How do you know he is not getting any better if he is sitting on the bench and not playing as much as you desire? Are you seeing him elsewhere outside of games? Obviously your assumption is that there is no improvement since he is not playing as much as you desire.
You may or may not be correct as to whether he is improving, but no doubt not as much improvement as you expect. Cam started on the bench and is playing now more and more...how did he get to that spot? Did Matt want only one athletic perimeter player and he chose Cam to be that player because he doesn't like Myles...a player he was very happy to get?
If Myles is not deserving of time due to his performance in practice...what happens to the culture of the team if he is awarded minutes that the other players don't believe is warranted? How does it affect other players? It is still a team sport. I don't think you can consider playing time for Myles in some form of a vacuum that has no effect on the team if members don't think he is ready. So, if you were actually the coach the decision might be a bit more blurred than you see today? Purdue is half way through the season and he might still make a movement. I hope he does...
edit below
concerning this perimeter abuse you imply that all see as the reason why Purdue hasn't got out of the sweet sixteen...were those "freshmen" players...or upper classmen?
Last edited:
I have no idea if the bench will shrink or not as the season goes on? Many were concerned about the wear and tear of the Big in the past. As of now more players playing not only rests more players a bit more than if there were less players through the grind of games AND it improves practices since all the players have hope of playing time...except Brian that I have some thoughts on my own. We may find fewer and somewhat different players in the tourney dependent on Purdue's player growth or lack of as well as what is needed in a particular game. Probably have half a season left...
It's because people fall victim to the infatuation with athleticism and ignore substance, just like the guys who evaluate high school talent do. If they didn't, Purdue wouldn't be top 3 in the country with a starting 5 rated 216, 122, unranked , 50 and unranked.
Re: Colvin
I think myself and a lot of other posters aren't stating that Colvin is the savior of team or even that he should be a major contributor. However, we need him to come in and add an offensive spark like he did against Gonzaga, if not now, certainly at some point(s) during the tournament...especially when Jones and/or Loyer aren't getting it done.
I think myself and a lot of other posters aren't stating that Colvin is the savior of team or even that he should be a major contributor. However, we need him to come in and add an offensive spark like he did against Gonzaga, if not now, certainly at some point(s) during the tournament...especially when Jones and/or Loyer aren't getting it done.
@Boiler79
Understand that I am not saying your hunch is wrong, because I don't know for certain that it is. What I do know is that there are other things in play and it isn't all defense. It is interesting that Lance is playing a lot and a valuable player. Would he as a freshman at SIU be capable of breaking into Purdue starting group back then? We tend to forget that there are a lot of senior guards at smaller schools that are really good...especially against freshman and sophomore guards at a bigger school. They have been through the wars and got a lot of practice and game time focus because they were the best the smaller schools had...and more physically and mentally mature than they were as freshmen or sophomores
Last edited:
Because the alternative is to say anything needs to improve or change by the players or more likely Painter.
They shot 60 percent because we played poor perimeter defense, and yes once you get hot, you are going to make some contested ones too.
No one but one person on here is saying "fire Painter" or anything like that. So when folks react to the mildest of suggestions or criticism of Painter by calling it "negativity" or "no one could have beaten Nebraska" it's not a serious response and it's as emotional as the dude who keeps typing nonsense in the other direction.
There's a weakness Painter still hasn't fully addressed. Is it unaddressable? Of course not. Are we doomed? No. Is it no big deal? Nope. We match up well with top teams because they usually have a big or two that can attempt to match up with Edey and they usually don't play small because they usually don't have to. So we end up with strength on strength, and we win that one, well pretty much every single time, almost literally every single time.
It's when we come up against a team without the ability to match up but with a mobile big that can shoot and a lot of perimeter players with quickness and shooting ability that we are at risk. Because our three point shooting is competent, and certainly better than last year, but our perimeter defense is not. This is the formula, clog the paint, and see who can hit more threes, them or us.
Either we are going to have to move from competent to outstanding from three, or we are going to have to improve on perimeter defense and how we handle the pick and roles/pops.
So, if painter had made the adjustments you think he should have made and Purdue still lost and Nebraska still shot 60% from 3…you’d feel a bit better, yes?
Process is more important than results certainly. Is your argument that the process was flawless? No possible improvement by either Painter or the players or both? Since my answer is no, I don't tend to think that improvement would have resulted in the exact same outcome, because Nebraska doesn't shoot 60 percent from 3 with better perimeter defense.
And since defense and offense are linked, if we'd put more stress on their defense than we did, with fewer turnovers, that probably helps too.
I can guarantee that Myles is getting better in practice. And once he shows in practice that he can compete against B1G teams, that will translate to more playing time. Painter is regarded as a very good developer of talent. At some point fans need to acknowledge that they really don't know as much about this team's talent and teamwork than the entire Purdue coaching staff does.
Painter is a phenomenal coach. Thrilled we have him. But the articles are out there. Even he has said we need to get more athleticism after recent Tourney flameouts. Colvin and Catchings fit the bill and then some. I haven't seen Benter play, but I've heard he's athletic. Gicari Harris is 6'4 and multiple SEC schools wanted him including Bruce Pearl who is no stranger to pushing the tempo and playing physical. He passes the sniff test for me. I don't know much about CJ Cox. Seems like a very high IQ guy based on the Ivy League offers.
Killing it in November/December and winning the Big Ten or at least competing for the Big Ten title is great. Consistently losing early round Tourney games for the same freaking reason over and over isn't great. And it's going to really suck if it happens again this year. Whether Colvin would make a difference or not is up for debate.
All fair points. I'm not saying Colvin is 100% the answer to our peremiter woes in games like last night. We know Morton isn't. We know Loyer isn't if he's cold or can't beat his defender. I actually like Jones and think he was a GREAT portal pickup to give us a physical presense to handle a press or tough peremiter D. Colvin is 6'5 and can outjump most players on the perimeter. If I'm Painter I'm giving him extended minutes in real game time situations to see if he can grow. If he doesn't then what does it hurt?
I don't begin to subscribe that Purdue lost for the same reasons the last three or so years. I spent a lot of time breaking down some things that took place in the North Texas game only because some thought it was other things. I pointed out in the video and the timing to see such. Purdue had the best athlete on the floor against St Peters and he was one of the worse players that game.
Not too long ago the same exact concern was about Cam that he wasn't getting enough playing time early. Well as a first year player, but two years in the system (because he also lost a year in high school due to an injury) he appears to be doing pretty well for little playing time so far. Myles can do the same. Is Berg the same player as when he came in and he got a lot less minutes than Myles early, but he has improved.
You are not the only one that wants to see Myles succeed. I'd have to check a couple different angles, but I probably like his shot about as much as anyone on the team. That said, whatever the reason, he isn't hitting right now. I think he will find his stroke and I think he will improve. Outside of Cam he is one of the more athletic people on Purdue....jumps well, but not quite as quick. Could be a processing thing as much as inherent ability. As I said before you could be right that with more playing time he would be much better and Purdue wouldn't be hurt. I have no sacred cow.
Purdue lost this year a pretty good athlete with size that had a nice stroke that many ...I included wanted (Brandon) to succeed and for whatever reason he wasn't as productive as we all believe he could have been. I haven't checked to see how he is doing. I hope well.
I don't know that you are wrong or different opinions are wrong. As said many times two different visions that have merit and flaws that probably succeed or fail tied specifically to the player inside a specific team style as to the thumbs up or down...
If you are to adjust our rotation - I think you start Heide and Gillis. Bring Loyer and TKR in off the bench because it gives our second group some fire power. Right now the TKR/Edey combination doesn’t make sense and isn’t fruitful. I feel like hat gives Heide more chances to gain confidence and minutes. Also gives TJR a chance to be the 5 which is more natural position.
Guess that leaves you with a question mark at the 4 when TKR is in for Zach. Perhaps Furst but dude has to get something offensively going.
Guess that leaves you with a question mark at the 4 when TKR is in for Zach. Perhaps Furst but dude has to get something offensively going.
A coach has to keep the locker room in good spirits. If he is constantly getting corrected in practice and plays more than those that don't...it is a bad situation. I don't know that is the situation, but easily could be. I've stated this three times. Team morale is important. He does jump well, but he also plays slow on offense . Matt runs a LOT of sets since the clock offers so little time to play at a slower pace. Processing the many different sets and rules on D must take place quickly. I haven't lost one ounce of hope for a player that I believed would be better than Jaden as a college player.
Now the team not near as good as this team you mentioned in an earlier post. Carsen and Ryan got hot for two weeks at the right time and almost got to the final four. Another player on that team that was a walk on that earned a scholly and never hardly ever got any minutes until his senior year was Grady. He also won a few games that year and go the key rebound that should have secured the win had Ryan made the FTs. He became a very good player for Purdue that produced and actually played in front of Aaron Wheeler who I saw earn the MVP of his prep school tourney. Aaron was LONG, could run and very athletic...and Aaron got a lot of minutes. There is no right or wrong answer IMO. I understand both sides.
Lance was a player as a senior that would give PUrdue trouble in the tourney should they have played. That is what happens...Purdue's youth have been in battles with mature players that have been through the wars that became good ball players for a lot of reasons, but generally because they were the best players those smaller school recruited and got a LOT of experience. Those small schools many times don't play in the tourney every year, but when certain schools are OLD they typically win their conference and you have old small school players playing against more youth in larger schools. Sometimes, both teams are old.
Hence my concern. Only guy on the roster with NBA potential outside of Edey.
Our perimeter defense is ranked 11th in the nation. We have some misses here and there but for the most part opposing teams have a hand in their face if they are shooting from 3. Nebraska just ignored the hands and hit everything. There is nothing you can do when a team is hitting like that. Everyone on here is overreacting to a freak performance by an opposing team, we didn't play bad we didn't play good either just kinda average. They just hit EVERY INSANE SHOT they put up.
Again a team that normally shoots ~35% just shot 61% from 3. It basically gave them an extra 18 points than they get on a normal night. All that against one of the best perimeter defenses in the NCAA. The sky isn't falling, they just played lights out.
I was much more worried about the team after the NW loss than I am about the game Tuesday. NW loss was the same crap that lost us games last year. The Nebraska game was purely a team playing at double the efficiency that they will play the rest of the season.
If Painter played him 30 minutes/game, would he be NBA ready by the end of the season?
What Purdue could have done was give up the back cuts and drives and entirely sell out on the 3 ball, but then Purdue might have got beat by the 2 ball as well. Purdue was sloppy the whole game and did not appear focused the entire game IMO . Purdue shot the 3 ball better than I originally thought, but no doubt could have rebounded better, had less turnovers and Zach could have got deeper position. Trey was MIA. That said...a normal game from them as you stated and Purdue probably wins. That said, don't expect normal games from teams that play Purdue. Purdue is and has been for a few years the measuring stick for all teams in the Big
What was troubling was after showing some grit and getting back in it, a few things went wrong, they hit some threes, and the wheels fell completely off.
Towards the end of the game Tominaga got the ball 6 feet behind the 3-pt line with a Purdue defender all over him. Without even looking at the basket until he was releasing the shot, he swished it. It was crazy. That comes from practicing thousands of shots on your home court. I don't think he makes that shot on another court.
Had X been defending him with his nut thrust, Tominaga wouldn't have lifted up and made the shot...but then Purdue would have X and that would be a bigger downer
Last edited:
I believe a problem was Purdue lead in turnovers again. Team is to careless with the ball many times. Nebraska also had 8 more steals. Between the two mentioned, that’s a lot of extra possessions to give up.
I mean I actually watched the game but sure we played perfectly
Potential is just potential until it’s production.
NE game Just wasn't "a team playing at double efficiency" It also was a game Purdue played poorly. Near season low 72 pts. Anytime Purdue has sub 40 halves their offense isn't clicking as it should. That 30 pt half was brutal to watch.
We are ranked 40th in opponent shooting % (allowing 40% while 1st-3rd is 34%-37% and then everyone else to Purdue is 38%-40% range) and 60th in opponent 3 pt% (allowing 30.7% while 1st place is allowing 25%).
With that said, we def didn’t play perfectly but a lot of their 3s they hit, we had a hand in their face or played good defense on em. I went back and watched and they hit a lot of difficult 3s. The ones that were wide open were actually hit by the guy edey was guarding except Hoiberg (40% 3 shooter on low volume) and Wilcher off a handoff screen where we were trailing and Allick set a good pick. Hoiberg was wide open due to Tominaga getting his guy in the air on a pump fake and then passing to an open Hoiberg as hoibergs man came to help…if I’m the coach, I live with this 3. Another wide open one was Allick—a 26% 3 pt shooter. Edey left him wide open, which I would too. Our perimeter defense was pretty decent except for…edey. Mast was able to pass and facilitate off the top of the key, while edey sagged back and our guards got back screened at the top of the key and there was no one back to help. Mast also hit 2 3s with edey sagged off and another one was hit by Williams while shot clock was winding down and edey sagged off him.
So I’d argue there’s more context here then just bad perimeter defense…Nebraska had a game plan and it was to draw edey out. They then back screened high to get guys open and allowed their 5 man to act as a very very veerrrryyy verrrrryyy poor man’s Jokic and he ran point. He even brought the ball up multiple times (looked like he waddled up the court haha). Our defense had a hand in their face or close to it a lot of those made 3s and have to really credit Nebraska for hitting the 3s that they did. Heide slowed down tominaga in the 2nd half, but Wilcher stepped up and went 4-4…2 of his we were in his grill but as Mark Jackson would say “good defense, Better offense”.
We also hit quite a few 3s and missed a few open ones that I feel we usually hit. Again, the good news is that the 3 ball was still there for us, which wasn’t happening last year.
So is there room for improvement? Hell yeah and it can be improved upon which is the good news. It’s the second loss where opponents shot over what we were allowing from 3 and overall %. Let’s see how we respond vs PSU and at IU.
Of course they had a game plan to draw Edey out, THAT'S the game plan to beat Purdue. It's the same game plan in most of these losses. And it usually ends up the same way although this time we didn't shoot poorly from outside.
I didn't say it's as simple as or only perimeter defense. And it's not a problem that shows up against opponents that allow Edey to more or less play down low on both ends. That allows our guards to play tighter on the perimeter because they know they have a rim protector to erase mistakes.
But when Edey isn't there and the other team has a mobile big that can shoot and other players that can shoot them yes that combo gives us problems and has been giving us problems for several years now and noting that isn't calling for painter to be fired or saying we are doomed but it IS a problem and it HASN'T been fully addressed yet and we didn't simply lose because "nobody could have stopped Nebraska."
Now one possible option would have been to put our best perimeter players and Gillis out there and switch everything and make them beat us off the dribble. But we didn't do a ton of that, or at least not enough of it in my opinion.
Fair points. I’m not sure who edey guards then if Gillis is on mast? He would have had to guard Williams who would have taken him off the dribble a whole lot and he could have shot the 3.
Maybe not, but if he get half of that (15mins/game), it will most likely help us not get beat by a double seated team this year. Painter and Purdue will be considered the biggest choker in college basketball if it happens again.
they already are so nothing to lose…well haha of course getting beat by a higher seed 😂
The point of cutting the rotation down to 7-8 is interesting. But Loyer is in the same class of terrible defense so who else do you cut out. If defense is the reason you don’t play then Loyer should sit
I’m not sure that a high post offense hasn’t been as big or bigger problem for Purdue when Purdue has seen it as 5 out. I do think Purdue has a mobile , good shooting 5 coming in next year. As Matt gets more of his first choice players we will see a quicker team. Recruits next year are a move that way
Link for this stat? Fletch is giving up 116.7 points per 100 possessions in conference play this year, and Braden is giving up 112.3 per 100 possessions. Those numbers are...kind of terrible. So I call BS.
