1. PG
2. Coach
If the size, talent, etc... can overcome these 2 things, the sky is the limit.
2. Coach
If the size, talent, etc... can overcome these 2 things, the sky is the limit.
This team is limited by only 2 things
- Thread starter NashvilleBoiler
- Start date
Guard play has been my concern. We seemingly have been able to recruit frontline guys recently, but now we do not have confident guards with great leadership. This program cannot count on 5th year guys to keep saving the day.
The other thing that is killing us is that our shooters can't shoot anymore. Dont know what has happened to Cline, Mathias, and Stephens. They have all been shooting worse than they are capable of this season.
If it's limited by its coach, who do you credit for the current record and success? Maybe you saw RD with the clipboard a couple times last week and are a bit confused.
Turnovers. Just slow it down and play boilermaker basketball.
Definitely #1. How many times can we fail to inbound the GD ball in the last minute of a game, let alone break a press if needed because we don't have anyone that can handle the ball? I guess that point falls on #2, huh? Hopefully he proves you wrong.
Size and talent? You're implying Hammons has been a first round lock since his freshmen year. Who developed him?
Rays offensive game has went to shit since the injury. I know his first game back he hit a few three. But since he has been none excistint. Even his drives to the lane off the AJ screen at the top of the key have been bricks. He damn near missed the bunny all by himself. When he has confidence in his shooting the rest of the guards feed off him.
C'mon man. If you want to play that argument out, then I'll take every other player Painter didn't develop into 1st round talent. Painter is what he is. He's a hustle/work guy. X's and O's are his weakness. See every inbound pass we've ever tried. When we NEED a basket, he's at his worst. He's has an Elite 8 cap like his mentor.
Note: Happy to be wrong. Hope I'm wrong.
I don't think you'd find too many basketball people that would agree with you. His game plans have been excellent in the past. Don't always get executed or get thrown off track sometimes. But he knows how to match up teams and do our best when overmatched. He's shown it time and time again.
PJ has low turnovers, because PJ never looks inside, never makes the tough pass and never progresses the offense...he is not facilitator and that's what this offense lacks....solid player, but only passes to the next guy in line on the perimeter...
I'm not trying to be combative, but you've got to credit the man for the body of work and not discuss amputating the arm for a papercut.
Agree on not being combative. We both are entitled to our opinions. It sounds like we have different criteria for measuring success. Neither is wrong. Mine only criteria for measuring success (Note: following Keady) is NCAA Tournament success. I stand by my evaluation.
I don't think you really watch or understand the game. Our PG play is fine. Our game planning is fine. We have some sloppy pass catching by our front line and some walks that aren't really walks, but that is the way the refs see them.
Ok. Talk to me after the Sweet 16 game where you're telling me it's not who you play, it's when you play them.I don't think you really watch or understand the game. Our PG play is fine. Our game planning is fine. We have some sloppy pass catching by our front line and some walks that aren't really walks, but that is the way the refs see them.
Be glad to. If I can help you understand the game a little better then its all good. You might enjoy the game better if you start before the NCAA's. Just saying...
Sure. A grinder at Wisky? Hell yeah!! Dakota's three pointers at the end are worth it IMO. At least you know who won going into it LOL!
It was tied at the half and the first half was ugly and frustrating. I'd fast forward until the second and start there.
If you think our PG play is "fine", then I know it would take too long to explain you out of the 1980's and into to present. You are entitled to your opinion. LolBe glad to. If I can help you understand the game a little better then its all good. You might enjoy the game better if you start before the NCAA's. Just saying...
ALERT *** ALERT *** ALERT *** ALERT
PJ played very well tonight. Wisconsin's 2nd best player had an off night.
Gee, I wonder why???
Purdue will be a top 8 team and you can credit Matt!!!
His biggest problem is that he needs to cut off small ball. Tonight was the best we played at it and only went down 4 after 2 minutes. If we need a change up - twin towers would work. AJ and Haas have been our 2 best players and the only way to give them more minutes is being creative in using the twin towers at different stages of the game.
PJ played very well tonight. Wisconsin's 2nd best player had an off night.
Gee, I wonder why???
Purdue will be a top 8 team and you can credit Matt!!!
His biggest problem is that he needs to cut off small ball. Tonight was the best we played at it and only went down 4 after 2 minutes. If we need a change up - twin towers would work. AJ and Haas have been our 2 best players and the only way to give them more minutes is being creative in using the twin towers at different stages of the game.
OMG, did we lose tonight on the road? We must be terrible
We must be terrible
Overreaction central..."Purdue will flame out of the tournament, you heard it here first".
This is stuff we have to put up with after a loss...why are we enduring this after a win again?
I would have to agree with the assessment of others...you must not understand the game if you don't think Painter is a competent coach, and very capable of leading this team to postseason success.
The second half of tonight's game is just one example I could point to...designed plays for Mathias, halftime adjustments to decrease turnovers and get guys focused in a hostile Big Ten road environment..the list goes on.
Look Nashville, I don't want to fight with you. I just don't agree with you that the coach is a problem. I don't agree that we had a PG problem in this Wisconsin game, or in any of the previous past... let's say 10 games.
The game in the 1980's (which you reference) was more position dependent, unlike today's very fluid games where specific positions mean less. If you watched, you would have seen Edwards, Biggie, and Mathias, all bring the ball up the court and initiate the plays. That is what confuses me about your comments. Hence my assumption that maybe you didn't watch this game, and were just spouting what you had heard might be an issue at the start of the season.
If March success is all that matters then I don't understand why you're complaining in December.
Good question, and I have one more:
1) Please explain how someone else other than Painter's "Sweet Sixteen ceiling" coaching allows the Baby Boilers to not mss a beat and make the Final Four after Hummel blew out his knee in Minneapolis, with Purdue all but guaranteed a #1 seed at the time.
Watch the whole game.I agree the first half was frustrating,but the defense always played hard,and Purdue scored the last six of the first half.
Not sure what's wrong with that. With passers like Stephens, Mathias, Biggie, etc - it isn't as necessary. PJ and Hill are taking mostly only good shots, not hanging onto the ball, playing active defense that is excellent at times, and are generally good decision makers. We get a lot of assists as a team which means they don't need to do everything themselves. It's refreshing compared to the past few seasons. This is the best Purdue has played in years.
IMO the Achilles heel is 3pt shooting %. Improve that and we're unstoppable.
And "coach"? Really? He's got the team performing as one of the top teams in the Big, which is much higher than where their overall recruiting classes have ranked. That proves some combination of excellent player development and game-time coaching.
Word on the street is that Shoop told the Purdue Guards to hold out on their shooting ability because they aren't being paid as much as the big men......Morgan and Shoop are to meet next week for negotiations and to work things out.Look for shooting to improve sometime after the Iowa game.......Boiler up!!!
I didn't think we shot that well, but 38.5% is pretty good. Unforced turnovers have to get corrected. This is still a fairly young team, so all of the weaknesses that people are noting can be corrected.
Agree, not a bad 3-pt shooting night against Wiscy, but a couple further thoughts - let's see Purdue hit 40% when shooting a lot of 3-point shots, and then lets see what that does to the other team's defensive game planning. When I say if Purdue shoots 40% the rest of the season, I mean for an average - where it has to be really respected. I think that would be a game changer. No team is going to commit to the perimeter when Purdue is hitting a "decent but OK" percentage of shots and not taking many - when they need to double up down low. Having said that, until Purdue starts shooting to its potential at the arc I'd rather see them take fewer shots and let that phase of the game come as it improves.
That the turnovers will get tightened up - assuming here that's a given since it's something the coaches can work on with the players and improve within their own system and ability, but you're right - a great all-around game with a lot of turnovers will give a good opponent a chance.
Depends what you mean by coaching. Painter isn't a great offensive coach, but he has the defense playing great, and you have to count that in. My problem with the offense is we too often have one look; get the ball down low. We don't feed the post in the truest form of a motion offense, we pass it around the perimeter only looking to feed the post. It causes the players to force it down there (turnovers), and also limits the guards from doing much in the offense during stretches. I'd like to see Ray and Vince be more aggressive turning the corner while running the weave up top. I'd also like to see Cline either play more or less. Shooters need to be on the court. Playing him 8-9 minutes isn't going to do much. Sure he will make his first few shots every once in a while and you'll play him because he gets hot, but those other nights you won't be letting him hardly get into a flow. If our shooters are Dakota, Stephens and Cline, you're going to have to find one to play 20+ minutes consistently or live with inconsistent shooting performances.
If the offense was what people wanted it to be and you do less defense, then we turn in to IU and look where they are compared to us. We have ONE loss ... ONE that was due to turnovers.
With the inside game and the defense we don't need to be a offensive juggernaut in order to win. Our record shows that our coach, game plan and shooting is fine. Could it be better? Sure. But we're winning games and THAT is the most important stat.
With all the negativity by some on here, you would of thought we lost by 20 yesterday. As long as we are winning, who cares how it is done? A win is a win whether the score is 36 to 35 or 90 to 50.
I get where people are coming from though, this is a school of engineers so I expect people to over-analyze things. It's in our nature.
With the inside game and the defense we don't need to be a offensive juggernaut in order to win. Our record shows that our coach, game plan and shooting is fine. Could it be better? Sure. But we're winning games and THAT is the most important stat.
With all the negativity by some on here, you would of thought we lost by 20 yesterday. As long as we are winning, who cares how it is done? A win is a win whether the score is 36 to 35 or 90 to 50.
I get where people are coming from though, this is a school of engineers so I expect people to over-analyze things. It's in our nature
.
Last edited:
Similar threads
