Our team is fine. We have a few players playing integral roles that lack in skill and decision making. When you are being hunted, this is not a good combo. It's also tough to take everyone's best shot every night. It reminds me of all those highly rated Duke teams. They took everyone's best every game for a decade on ESPN. For the most part, those Kryshewski coached teams handled those environments very well. We've had those environments for 2 years now. Every loss has been a court storm. Takes a special mindset to handle those hostile situations.
The biggest concern and potential fatal flaw
- Thread starter IowaMuse
- Start date
Purdue's best tourney success came in the year Carson Edwards played more than 35 minutes a game and Cline played almost 34. Those two guys unbelievable play in the tournament carried us to within one shot of the final four. No two players are the same. Maybe Loyer couldn't play those types of minutes but I believe Smith and Jones could.
At the end of the day what I'm really proposing is kicking the minutes Loyer and Jones are getting up from 26 to 31 or 32 and picking one guy to get the vast majority of the remaining minutes. I'd rather Painter pick on guy and give them 25 minutes (Hiede) so they can get in the flow of the game, than split those minutes between 3 guys.
You could still use Morton or Colvin situationally, but I don't believe either of them have done enough to show they belong to be in the "rotation". From my prospective, the question shouldn't be whether Morton should be taking minutes that Colvin could be getting, it's should Morton be getting minutes that Jones and Loyer could be getting if they weren't sitting on the bench,
Hope we start to see Heide go to 20-25 a game. Going to start needing his height, athleticism and scoring ability over the next few months…need to get him confident and comfortable as much as possible to be ready for March and beyond.
Okay, does that put more wear on fewer players doing it now? If not done now, can it be done in particular games going forward? Hasn't Matt traditionally put more minutes on fewer closer to the tourney? Carsen and Ryan's team was not a great team. Carsen got hot for a couple of weeks and Ryan got hot one game. A month before and Purdue maybe gets beat earlier since some games that year were not as good as the tourney production.
I don't have an answer on cutting the rotation. I would assume since many believe that the grinder of the Big was detrimental to the tourney that if able to win and not cut so many minutes that it is best for Purdue...."IF" the assumption that the grind of the big takes a toll. Every year there are teams with as much talent as this Purdue team and every year some get knocked off. Lot of time in the season to see if things start to develop a certain direction
I also don’t think think playing 3 B1G tournament games in 3 days after already playing 20 B1G games was helpful.
Would love to see Paint “load manage” some guys in the first round, but it will never happen.
Let's hope Purdue rolls early and rests starters 40% of the early 2 games in the tourney. Obviously something is in play since the Big is tough day in and day out and perhaps not doing as well in the tourney should that be true. I think you are correct about the tourney. The kids want to win as well, but it certainly puts more fatigue on the Big Teams
Every conference except for the IVY has a tournament. Our guys aren't any more fatigued then any other conference. If any are arguing that our conference's style of play makes our guys more fatigued for the tournament, then you are agreeing with me that this conference is poor preparation for the tournament. Different reason then I have, but same argument.
I'm saying at some point you consider sitting Edey in a game like this and matching up. Particularly if it's middle of second half and the game has gone the way it did. But I know that's blasphemy and isn't likely to happen.
They will be more fatigued soon with the upcoming travel coast to coast in different time zones. Over the course of a season that will be an issue I believe.
What we have is Big Teams not advancing to the final stages due to something? I really haven't tried to understand conference size, depth and coaching to try to get a grasp on how many tough games the Big has twice a week. Typically, the Big is deep making for many tough games with good coaching Road games historically have been tough and a key to winning the Big. Why the Big hasn't fared as well considering going far in the tourney can have many speculations as to why.
Was the Big prepared as far as knowing how to execute against various types of play...AND did the Big have the personnel to execute what was needed? If not, then what happened to alter before and after conference results against variety of styles? Only explanation I could come up with is habits...months after preseason gets teams locked into some habit that somehow makes playing styles previously successful against now not as successful either due to the Big Teams for not seeing it enough or the other teams getting much better at what they do?
The other thought is that the Big is prepared for other approaches, but the grueling season takes a toll not just physically, but mentally, and the teams are worn down at the end of the season and as you say...the Big Tourney makes it even worse by being so close to playing the NCAA tourney. Does the physical play allowed make it worse for teams to advance in the tourney? No idea, but personally I think the whistle changes. The big allows more physical shoving and pushing by the bigs it seems. Big players in the Big don't find the same number of scrapes, digs and overall quick slaps as is allowed in the tourney I don't think. I see more of this I "believe" in the Big East as well. Perhaps a different whistle adds to the speculation? Granted some of those Big refs that are more common faces in the Big end up doing tourney games...but perhaps not as much with the same group of partners they normally work with in the Big. Lot of speculation, but for me it isn't thinking the Big teams were not good enough...
What you posted has a lot of merit I believe. Just looking at Purdue, don’t think they’re athletic enough for some of the games especially the tournament. I very much agree with you on how the games are called in the conference is much different in March. All of the discussed points have an impact on why Purdue and the Big has failed in March.
So to play devil's advocate here...are Arizona, UT, Gonzaga, Marquette, Alabama, and Illinois not athletic enough? Or maybe you don't mean athleticism, but more so our style of play?
Nah not blasphemy. But I'd say it'd take some guts to sit Edey as that's technically what Nebraska would want to happen...however, we got the lead back to 1 in that game with him, correct? And then they countered with hitting three 3's or something and jumped back out to 10. So it's hard to go away from what has got the success so far.
However, tbh, I agree. In that situation or any other games this year prior to March, it would be good to see how we match up without Edey on the floor. It may be a lull for a bit, but we should play Smith, Loyer/Heide, Jones, and a combo of TKR/Furst/ Gillis for stretches at a time because there will come a time in the tourney where we either need to A. play without Zach due to foul trouble or B. play without Zach because there's some combo of junk defense/we are down some points and need to score quick/their big is like Mast and is carving us up by running point and or hitting outside shots.
other than Illinois those teams don't play in the Big and so the various potential reasons for Big Teams do not apply to non Big teams without deeper study...at least from me. Purdue played ALL those teams and their different styles and won all of them. Purdue has lost 2 out of 3 road games in the Big..."style" being a problem doesn't seem to be....
The Michigan State team that Magic Johnson led to the NCAA championship in 1979 won every tournament game by double digits. They were highly regarded all year. What was their road record in the Big Ten? 4-5.
One of the big difference between then and now besides the 3 ball was the clock. A team could play cerebral understanding the game conditions, and optimize their team accordingly. Rather than Zach post and be denied and then do it again and abandon it due to the clock playing defense, that team could do it a third time. Teams could punish teams for poor play earlier in the game...late in the game, by not being in a hurry. Today, the team AND cerebral play has been diminished with the clock due to the NCAA believing that fans want the clock or that fans will appreciate a clock if they didn't originally want it.
Now, please explain the point you were making with Road games and Championship...it went over my head. Apparently, I had another dumb moment...
I'm talking more middle of the second half. I certainly wouldn't sit him ever to start the second half. But if you are under 10 and down by 10 and he's got barely 10, well, maybe you mix it up a bit and if it gets closer you can always bring him back in.
How’d we beat them all and all these others teams in non conf?
If we aren’t as athletic or not very athletic How are we going to beat anyone else? (Hint, being the most athletic doesn’t mean you always win)
I guess the only thing we have going for us is that the tournament is a single game elimination and maybe we get lucky, as the projected number 1 overall seed, to beat teams and hope we catch them on an off night.
Last edited:
I read his post as this being his point. Some are saying that Purdue will struggle with athletic teams, but the record disproves that.
Purdue has a monkey on its back and winning the next two would ease that a bit...
Beating PSU is a must to right the ship. Beating IU is a must for every imaginable reason.
The problem seems to exist in March. Either our guys are all worn down or when the intensity of the tournament is in effect, athleticism is more of a factor. Those open look threes get a lot less open.
Being ignorant in how the numbers are determined... who determines who gives up points? If a person switches and the switch being good or bad ...and possibly not knowing who was in fault...how is the basket scored against someone? If helping out due to another's inability to contain and your player scores...who gets the points going against them? If the first rotation is good and no score and the second rotation doesn't let the first rotation get scored upon but the second rotation guy scores due to no third level successful rotation...who gets blamed? If the coach wants you to double and your guy dives and scores...is that your fault?
I could go on and on with examples like this and so I'm sincere in trying to understand the accuracy of points against or is this similar to a +/- on offense where no nobody is actually responsible, but a group assignment for the duration of the scoring during a time segment regardless of who is being scored upon? Is it actually assigned to a player or just every player during a certain time segment gets credited which are quite different. If not hard, help me understand how the math happens and then I'll have a better idea how meaningful it is
The results in March may not be due to athletic ability and if they are...what happened early in the season and later in the season. Purdue had the most athletic player on the court against St Peters and he wasn't very good. I don't have an answer...but Purdue got really good looks last year. In the final minutes of the game against St Peters when it ws "possible" the shot clock was down to about 2 seconds with their player on the floor 25 feet away from the basket and Mason jumped on him resulting in a foul which led to points. Mason is bright...how did he go brain dead? Something is going on, but I really don't know what. We also know that the smaller schools have mature bodies if they made the tourney and I recall seeing their 6'7" guys jumping over the back of Purdue bigs and such. I don't have an answer...
And IU must beat Purdue to have a shot at the tourney in March. Hope we are ready for that…they need to beat us more than we need to beat them.
Hm. We weren’t more athletic than UT in the S16 with Carsen. Saint Peter’s wasn’t more athletic than us in the S16…unfortunately, we prob were about even with FDU. In our two losses this year I’d say overall we were pretty evenly matched athletically, northwestern may have had a bit more athleticism in their backcourt..but I’d almost say that was more skill.
Should I wait until next year and hope we are more athletic to maybe win in March?
Purdue needs to beat IU to start another streak. The have lost the games due to lack of poise when the crowd got going and the pressure extended. Purdue needs to handle that this year. IU beat Purdue at Mackey last year, but the other games PUrdue could have easily won
I would argue Purdue is less athletic most of the time. When Loyer, Edey, Morton, etc. are on the floor most teams are more athletically gifted. Doesn’t mean you can’t win, but in March it becomes increasingly more difficult as these type of players have to exert all they have all the time. They may be worn down and mentally fatigued at seasons end. Might have happened to Smith at seasons end last year. That poor kid was worn out. Anyway there’s my take.
I believe this team is more skill than athletic, if athletic is strength, quickness and jumping. I think next year Matt retains skill and improves athletic ability. Caleb is athlete, less skill. Mason is skill, less athlete. Trey is more skill, less athlete. Braden has a bit of both. Fletcher is more skill, less athlete. Lance athletic over skill. Zach more skill than athletic. Cam athletic with some skill. Myles athletic with some skill. Brian more athletic over skill.
I don't see any of the players that play a lot as athletic as much as skill, but I'm also not saying they are not athletic...just what I think their leans are. It makes sense. If you can't get who you want that has both...and Matt has been there for many years...we know Matt leans to skill and so you would expect the players to be more skillful than athletic...it is also why containing the dribble a problem for all teams may be a bit worse for Purdue in the past. I do think the offense and defense morphs a bit after this year into a faster tempo and maybe more pressure on D. I don't anticipate pressing as Matt generally does not believe in stretching the D away from protecting the rim...and has he believes (and I do too) that turnovers are self inflicted. Anyway, compared to many teams Purdue is more skillful than athletic in my mind...but you have to be athletic somewhat to hit the court.
I read the first sentence and ignored the novel afterwards.
Defensive Efficiency Calculation Per Player
For those who think it's easier to annoy you than to Google 'Defensive efficiency calculation per player' themselves.
The novel particularly for those that have a shorter attention span listed questions thinking you might know what you posted since you were responding to another with something you thought was important, but the fact is my questions were not addressed and your response to another is like a +/- when playing rather than the specific defensive mishaps for an individual player. Not sure why you used that data in your response to another as some pinpointed accuracy on how good of a defense a particular player does...when it doesn't get that specific. I was trying to help you understand a bit more and being nice in the process to the fallacies of your implication if that was happening...and apparently it was.I read the first sentence and ignored the novel afterwards.
Defensive Efficiency Calculation Per Player
For those who think it's easier to annoy you than to Google 'Defensive efficiency calculation per player' themselves.letmegooglethat.com
just for the record a novel is fiction. The length varies...
So do you believe that turnovers are a result due to being less athletic, less skill, or mental? Purdue seems to most always have more turnovers than the opponent.
Some of it is due to style of play, particularly on defense. Purdue tries to stay sound on defense, giving up contested shots without fouling and controlling the boards, but not taking a lot of gambles. Offensively, Purdue should be closer to average, but it is harder to keep turnovers low when emphasizing feeding the post. Opponents are going to do everything in their power to make it difficult to deliver the ball to Edey in scoring position and are going to try to disrupt Edey before he gets a shot.
That said, I think that this Purdue team is capable of keeping its own turnovers low if they pay attention to detail. When things are going well, I think that Purdue can win the turnover battle slightly, while winning the shooting, rebounding, and free throw battles more decisively. It’s just the way that the team is built.
If turnovers are limited to stealing passes, and for this team, then I believe it is more mental. I believe (and many fans do NOT) that offensive players control almost all turnovers. That is not to discredit good D, but just that I think the offensive players have choices to not make turnovers. That said, there is a fine line between being aggressive to make things happen and being more passive to not press things to happen. I think turnovers due to pass and catch (and here I'm trying to confine this to half court since most turnovers happen there) come down to 1) Is the guy open? 2) Is the angle correct for the pass? 3) Is the spacing such that you don't have to knock a guys head off to complete the pass? 4) Is the spacing too long? 5)if not rolling does he have the defender sealed?
That was off the top of my head generally for post feeds. Coming off of away ball screens those five can still apply, but will add a few more. 1) Is the screen at the correct angle with stance? 2) Does the guy about to come off the screen set up his defender for a good rub? 3) Is the timing of the screen being set and the player coming off the screen at the CORRECT timing to receive the pass? Can be on time or late, but not early. 4) Does the passer when applicable fake a pass, shoot or dribble to throw his defender off? 5)Does the passer not get automatic and just throw the ball...not reading the D away from him 6) Does the passer place the ball where the D should not get it..."counting on" the guy coming off the screen doing his job to get open? 7) Does the passer make it difficult on himself by being getting in air with read options not as open as thought?
Those are on top of my head. If those are legitimate reasons for turnovers, then all are controlled by the offense and are mental. This does NOT intend to suggest that perfection can be obtained and realize that turnovers happen to all teams and that I'm unaware of a team ever having 0 turnovers. All that said...athletic teams...particularly quick teams should make all those things more difficult if their coach pushes defense, because they have the ability to recover quicker from a good situation from the offense. One way to think of defense is how much space can be covered and in what time does it take...and that certainly points to athletic ability. I'm just one that thinks the team must believe they control everything (even if reality is different sometimes) so that the blame lies with your team for improvement...and with that view most turnovers are mental. Fatigue many times is a factor in poor decisions in fouling, being sloppy in offense and defense.
