Transfer Portal Recruiting

Roeder

Junior
Jun 21, 2007
2,113
2,823
113
I can't believe all the whining on here (well maybe I can).

Jenkins by some accounts was the best portal guard still available. This team desperately needs guard depth. He might surprise and average 10-12 ppg, and that's great. He might get beat out by the other guys for PT and average 3-4 ppg in spot duty......and that's still great! This team desperately needed another body at guard to make it through a long season. He is simply another piece to the puzzle.
 

SCBoiler1

Redshirt Freshman
Feb 10, 2014
1,178
1,633
113
1) Berg
2) Edey
3) Furst
4) TKR
5) Gillis
6) Waddell
7) Heide
8) Newman
9) Loyer
10) Smith
11) Morton
12) Jenkins

When you look at the roster and understand that Painter is going to only play 8 or 9 guys, my guess would be that Painter maybe looking for a starting lineup that pairs Jenkins with a bigger guard at the point. Maybe something like this:

1) Morton
2) Jenkins
3) Newman
4) Furst
5) Edey

With bench guys:
6) Gillis (at the 3 or 4)
7) TKR (at the 3 or 4)
8) Loyer (at the 1 or 2)
9) Smith (at the 1)

Odd men out:
Berg
Waddell
Heide

Even if Jenkins can't play the point, I actually think this takes more minutes from Smith than anyone else because I don't see us pairing two guards under 6'1" in the lineup.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zaphod_B and Roeder

bonefish1

All-American
Oct 4, 2004
14,034
12,937
113
I think there's still room to bring in a ball dominant PG who can create, distribute and score. (the question is, are any available?)

Jenkins reminds me of Proctor. Not a great athlete, but can score. Probably won't create off the bounce or break down the D but will find ways to get points.
 
Nov 24, 2003
421
401
63
I think there's still room to bring in a ball dominant PG who can create, distribute and score. (the question is, are any available?)

Jenkins reminds me of Proctor. Not a great athlete, but can score. Probably won't create off the bounce or break down the D but will find ways to get points.
I was just thinking the same thing. Proctor and Jenkins are very similar players. Here's a look at their stats:

David Jenkins Jr.

Jahaad Proctor
 

SDBoiler1

All-American
Gold Member
Jul 30, 2001
23,134
15,889
113
New Haven, CT
I think there's still room to bring in a ball dominant PG who can create, distribute and score. (the question is, are any available?)

Jenkins reminds me of Proctor. Not a great athlete, but can score. Probably won't create off the bounce or break down the D but will find ways to get points.
He’s a better scorer than Proctor. For sure Jenkins is a better 3PT shooter.
 

Wolegib

All-American
May 23, 2013
9,051
5,254
113
I can't believe all the whining on here (well maybe I can).

Jenkins by some accounts was the best portal guard still available. This team desperately needs guard depth. He might surprise and average 10-12 ppg, and that's great. He might get beat out by the other guys for PT and average 3-4 ppg in spot duty......and that's still great! This team desperately needed another body at guard to make it through a long season. He is simply another piece to the puzzle.
you must be new here. this is nothing compared to the past or what the future whining will be like during the season. this is rather lame and tame. as for needing another body, we already had several capable walk-ons who could have easily filled that role. we didn't need another potential bench player. Give a couple of our walk-ons a starting job and they could average 10-12 points too.
 

Wolegib

All-American
May 23, 2013
9,051
5,254
113
That’s strange the only J&C article I saw on this pickup mentioned no such thing. It said we had some inexperience at guard and the two freshmen would share pg duties with Morton. No implication that loyer or smith would start at PG. Can you post a link?

painter was just interviewed this week on this and he basically said Morton will be the starting PG unless he can get a “quintessential point.”
here you go. look at what i said. I said he'd play primarily at SG because of his defense. and one of our younger inexperienced players would start at PG . isn't that what this J&C also said? https://sports.yahoo.com/utah-transfer-david-jenkins-jr-203141260.html
 

Wolegib

All-American
May 23, 2013
9,051
5,254
113
Then it just goes into the ether. Why not use it on some depth/scoring? I hope this guy wins a game or two for us next season and all the naysayers can suck it.

It's like your PTO at work...if you don't use it you essentially lose it.
but why not just give it to one of our walk-ons for a year?
 

Wolegib

All-American
May 23, 2013
9,051
5,254
113
other top 10 teams start freshmen, so why can't Purdue? why start a mediocre senior at SG when we have very talented freshmen who could do better? and from everything that has been said, he wasn't brought here to play PG.
 

Statey

True Freshman
Mar 3, 2014
918
543
93
you must be new here. this is nothing compared to the past or what the future whining will be like during the season. this is rather lame and tame. as for needing another body, we already had several capable walk-ons who could have easily filled that role. we didn't need another potential bench player. Give a couple of our walk-ons a starting job and they could average 10-12 points too.
Surely this is in jest. You think he's no more valuable than a walk-on? That's preposterous.
 

Dryfly88

Junior
Jul 9, 2015
2,141
2,229
113
you must be new here. this is nothing compared to the past or what the future whining will be like during the season. this is rather lame and tame. as for needing another body, we already had several capable walk-ons who could have easily filled that role. we didn't need another potential bench player. Give a couple of our walk-ons a starting job and they could average 10-12 points too.
Good Lord! The greatest Walk-on PU has ever had (Eifert) averaged 5.5 his Senior year.
 

Statey

True Freshman
Mar 3, 2014
918
543
93
Good Lord! The greatest Walk-on PU has ever had (Eifert) averaged 5.5 his Senior year.
Right. In the last 7 seasons (as far back as athletic dept website provides stats) , only 4 guards not named Ivey or Carsen have averaged 10+ a game. But sure, this seems like the year a walk-on could pull it off!

21/22 - Sasha @ 10.4
19/20 - Hunter @ 10.6
18/19 - Cline @ 12.0
17/18 - Mathias @ 12.0
 

mathboy

All-American
Feb 4, 2004
10,440
10,136
113
Michigan
I still don't understand how, as a Top 10 team last year with serious playing time available in the backcourt, somehow Painter has gotten this low on the transfer portal hierarchy. Nothing against Jenkins. But this is absolutely disappointing...
Let me help you. It’s called NiL. It’s all about the Benjamin’s
 

johnboiler123

True Freshman
Jul 23, 2020
588
762
93
I agree but if this is guy gets an offer and accepts are we done? Again, I don't see it as much of an upgrade over Newman or Loyer at the 2.

We don't need more guards, we need better guards than we already have. If this guy commits and we go after another guard we'll have a lot of bodies in the backcourt.
We only have 4 guys right now for our guard positions. Two of them are true frosh and out of the 2, one is an undersized guard whose best offer besides us was Belmont. Out of the other two, one is a backup level player and the other is our only known talent. I agree this guy is probably not an upgrade over Newman(whose potential I still like), but we still need to add at least one more body to our backcourt IMO.
 

SCBoiler1

Redshirt Freshman
Feb 10, 2014
1,178
1,633
113
He’s a better scorer than Proctor. For sure Jenkins is a better 3PT shooter.
I'd call him a shooter more than a scorer. Maybe even a three point specialist.

He shoots the three at a good clip and looks to be a good free throw shooter but his 2 point percentage has been really low the last 2 years. Under 40%. The only boilers to shoot under 40% from 2 in the last 2 years were Morton in 2020-2021 and Newman in 2021-2022. He also averaged less assists per 40 than any Boiler other than Furst.

While looking this up I found an interesting stat. Newman was 0-4 from 2 in conference play last year. He made 27 two pointers in conference the year before. I wonder what the odds would have been at the beginning of last year that Newman wouldn't make a 2 pointer in conference play?
 

SCBoiler1

Redshirt Freshman
Feb 10, 2014
1,178
1,633
113
We only have 4 guys right now for our guard positions. Two of them are true frosh and out of the 2, one is an undersized guard whose best offer besides us was Belmont. Out of the other two, one is a backup level player and the other is our only known talent. I agree this guy is probably not an upgrade over Newman(whose potential I still like), but we still need to add at least one more body to our backcourt IMO.
I liked your post but have to ask. Who is the backup level player and who is the only know talent?
 

SCBoiler1

Redshirt Freshman
Feb 10, 2014
1,178
1,633
113
Right. In the last 7 seasons (as far back as athletic dept website provides stats) , only 4 guards not named Ivey or Carsen have averaged 10+ a game. But sure, this seems like the year a walk-on could pull it off!

21/22 - Sasha @ 10.4
19/20 - Hunter @ 10.6
18/19 - Cline @ 12.0
17/18 - Mathias @ 12.0
Barrett, Frost, Martin and Washburn combined for 12 total points last year up from 9 the year before. At that rate of improvement........... Oh wait, he said per game. Never mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schnelk and bwebb32

johnboiler123

True Freshman
Jul 23, 2020
588
762
93
I liked your post but have to ask. Who is the backup level player and who is the only know talent?
Morton is the backup level guy. Honestly that was me being nice too. Just really never been a fan of his game and honestly don't think he's all that talented. Newman is the known talent. IMO it was a dumb move by Painter to sit him on the bench all last year. Other than Ivey, he's shown more potential than any of our other guards last year. Would not have blamed him at all if he transferred after how he was treated, and Painter should be thanking God that he decided to stay.
 

mathboy

All-American
Feb 4, 2004
10,440
10,136
113
Michigan
Welcome Mr. Jenkins! Regarding Mr. Jenkins, I think there are a couple simple points that need to be re-examined:

1. Jenkins will start and wouldn’t have come unless he was promised that. I think No. He might just want to be a part of a winning team. He knows he is not going to play pro, so why not go out with a winning program where the teammates like each other? If I were in his shoes, that I would like to do.

2. He is not a PG so he doesn’t really help us. I think not true. We need players in the back court. What if Newman repeats his poor play this next year? We need someone who can shoot, and who can play that 2-spot. Ugh, I hate to use numerical designations for Painters teams.

3. Jenkins can’t play point. Maybe true. So what? Painters teams tend not to rely on true point guards. We have played PG by committee and used a point-forward in the past. Besides, Loyer might be good enough to handle the job as a starter. If Jenkins can handle the ball as well as an average P5 guard, he will be a big help.

Just my two cents. :cool:
 

boilerball2021

Redshirt Freshman
Gold Member
Jul 29, 2021
1,355
825
113
Welcome Mr. Jenkins! Regarding Mr. Jenkins, I think there are a couple simple points that need to be re-examined:

1. Jenkins will start and wouldn’t have come unless he was promised that. I think No. He might just want to be a part of a winning team. He knows he is not going to play pro, so why not go out with a winning program where the teammates like each other? If I were in his shoes, that I would like to do.

2. He is not a PG so he doesn’t really help us. I think not true. We need players in the back court. What if Newman repeats his poor play this next year? We need someone who can shoot, and who can play that 2-spot. Ugh, I hate to use numerical designations for Painters teams.

3. Jenkins can’t play point. Maybe true. So what? Painters teams tend not to rely on true point guards. We have played PG by committee and used a point-forward in the past. Besides, Loyer might be good enough to handle the job as a starter. If Jenkins can handle the ball as well as an average P5 guard, he will be a big help.

Just my two cents. :cool:
If Newman repeats his poor play you might as well sign us up for the CBI.
 

purduepat1969

All-American
Sep 28, 2011
13,443
19,284
113
Let me help you. It’s called NiL. It’s all about the Benjamin’s
Uh, duh. I get that. Again, how are we that low on the hierarchy and that far behind in NIL that we haven't figured out how to get a competitive offer to a transfer?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Schnelk

POTFHBTFU

Redshirt Freshman
Jul 25, 2021
1,239
1,232
113
here you go. look at what i said. I said he'd play primarily at SG because of his defense. and one of our younger inexperienced players would start at PG . isn't that what this J&C also said? https://sports.yahoo.com/utah-transfer-david-jenkins-jr-203141260.html
I read that article too. It does not say anywhere one of our true freshmen (inexperienced) players would start at PG. That is the part you made up in both posts (younger inexperienced). It says we are young at PG with the three that will play (2 of 3 is true freshman) but Morton is not inexperienced and one of the oldest on the team. He’s going into his third year and traveling to Europe. He played a lot of minutes late last year.
 

POTFHBTFU

Redshirt Freshman
Jul 25, 2021
1,239
1,232
113
but why not just give it to one of our walk-ons for a year?
We still have one more, one will probably get it. Plus it’s not like we have a Grady eifert or Luce this year, have you seen our walk-ons play? This guy was a major contributor for a pac-12 team including a bunch of starts. He will probably start for us.
 

bonefish1

All-American
Oct 4, 2004
14,034
12,937
113
other top 10 teams start freshmen, so why can't Purdue? why start a mediocre senior at SG when we have very talented freshmen who could do better? and from everything that has been said, he wasn't brought here to play PG.
Who's this 'very talented' freshmen you speak of?
 

Statey

True Freshman
Mar 3, 2014
918
543
93
Welcome Mr. Jenkins! Regarding Mr. Jenkins, I think there are a couple simple points that need to be re-examined:

1. Jenkins will start and wouldn’t have come unless he was promised that. I think No. He might just want to be a part of a winning team. He knows he is not going to play pro, so why not go out with a winning program where the teammates like each other? If I were in his shoes, that I would like to do.

2. He is not a PG so he doesn’t really help us. I think not true. We need players in the back court. What if Newman repeats his poor play this next year? We need someone who can shoot, and who can play that 2-spot. Ugh, I hate to use numerical designations for Painters teams.

3. Jenkins can’t play point. Maybe true. So what? Painters teams tend not to rely on true point guards. We have played PG by committee and used a point-forward in the past. Besides, Loyer might be good enough to handle the job as a starter. If Jenkins can handle the ball as well as an average P5 guard, he will be a big help.

Just my two cents. :cool:
1. I think "promise" is practically semantics at times. Coaches of schools can very accurately say "we don't have a wealth of experienced depth and believe your skills can translate in a big way with our needs". The promise of being a starter isn't explicit, but kids can absolutely put 2 and 2 together to infer significant playing time. And more often than not, the guys playing the most minutes are the ones starting, so this isn't an unreasonable leap for kids to hear "starter" in an otherwise benign/generic statement.

2. Agree, depth is important, whether a true PG or not. Surprised by the volume of "I don't see how he helps us" takes.

3. Agree again. Ball handling by committee isn't necessarily ideal, but it can clealry be a workable situation when there is no true PG. While he's not dropping dimes to everyone on the floor, it's not like he's been a turnover machine either. At worst, this is a push.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abugabby

New Pal Boiler

All-American
Jun 30, 2010
16,542
18,617
113
Uh, duh. I get that. Again, how are we that low on the hierarchy and that far behind in NIL that we haven't figured out how to get a competitive offer to a transfer?
There’s no question we got blindsided by the direct payments to players from boosters being classified as NIL deals. We may never catch up in that arena, unless Bone becomes a billionaire.
 

FirstDownB

All-American
Oct 12, 2015
9,273
13,030
113
Does anyone else get the feeling that Painter recruits for one type of lineup but tends to play a different, often smaller, lineup based on the reality of what personnel combinations actually work? It seems like this is a cause for lack of depth at the guard position and we end up with a roster full of spot-up shooters, 4's, and 5's. Ergo dumpster diving in the portal for 6'2 guys who can somewhat handle the ball and stay in front of somebody.
 

mathboy

All-American
Feb 4, 2004
10,440
10,136
113
Michigan
Does anyone else get the feeling that Painter recruits for one type of lineup but tends to play a different, often smaller, lineup based on the reality of what personnel combinations actually work? It seems like this is a cause for lack of depth at the guard position and we end up with a roster full of spot-up shooters, 4's, and 5's. Ergo dumpster diving in the portal for 6'2 guys who can somewhat handle the ball and stay in front of somebody.
No, not really.

I think you are taking a singular situation and trying to make a trend from it.

Next year we have two very good guards coming in, and we may get another the year after. That was already in the bank before Hunter decided to leave. Recruiting can't turn on a dime, but a starting PG might decide to leave after the season and surprise the coach. Now we have a slight hole to fill before those guards arrive. That is the way college athletics are. Not everyone can field a four/five star line up every year.
 

mathboy

All-American
Feb 4, 2004
10,440
10,136
113
Michigan
If Newman repeats his poor play you might as well sign us up for the CBI.
Our prospects do not hang on Newman's play. We have more than enough other talent to construct a winning season and a top five BIG finish. I think you are not a supporter of Matt Painter and have decided to fill this summer with lots of chicken little posts. I wish you would approach the team and this board with a more positive perspective. You would think after the success we have had over the last 5-10 years you would get it.
 

FirstDownB

All-American
Oct 12, 2015
9,273
13,030
113
No, not really.

I think you are taking a singular situation and trying to make a trend from it.

Next year we have two very good guards coming in, and we may get another the year after. That was already in the bank before Hunter decided to leave. Recruiting can't turn on a dime, but a starting PG might decide to leave after the season and surprise the coach. Now we have a slight hole to fill before those guards arrive. That is the way college athletics are. Not everyone can field a four/five star line up every year.
Maybe I am. But Hunter was always planned to leave after 2021-22 season. It shouldn't have been a surprise. Certainly not to the extent that you take zero guards in the 2021 class, while the only guards from the 2020 class are (1) a known flight risk and (2) a non-traditional point guard. When that non-traditional guard finds his pace more suited to defending the 3 spot, then you go from slim depth to none very quickly.

I still see people rolling out projected BIG lineups even though for years now Painter has gone almost exclusively with 3-guard lineups. But I understand where they are coming from, because when you break down the roster, it appears by our recruiting we were counting on some forwards playing the 3 and some wings being legit 1 or 2 guards. The imbalance is how you end up with 2-3 scholarship players sitting and watching while there are legitimate skill gaps on the roster.

Let me ask this. Where does Waddell fit into the rotation this year? He was added to the 2021 class AFTER Furst and TKR were in the fold. Was he a 'take'? Either in hindsight or foresight. Nothing against the guy, but could that spot not have been used more effectively on a 3-star combo guard with some quickness and ball handling skills? To me, the composition of that 2021 class looks different from a skills perspective if you are planning to run a 3 guard lineup out there every game.
 

SCBoiler1

Redshirt Freshman
Feb 10, 2014
1,178
1,633
113
1. I think "promise" is practically semantics at times. Coaches of schools can very accurately say "we don't have a wealth of experienced depth and believe your skills can translate in a big way with our needs". The promise of being a starter isn't explicit, but kids can absolutely put 2 and 2 together to infer significant playing time. And more often than not, the guys playing the most minutes are the ones starting, so this isn't an unreasonable leap for kids to hear "starter" in an otherwise benign/generic statement.

2. Agree, depth is important, whether a true PG or not. Surprised by the volume of "I don't see how he helps us" takes.

3. Agree again. Ball handling by committee isn't necessarily ideal, but it can clealry be a workable situation when there is no true PG. While he's not dropping dimes to everyone on the floor, it's not like he's been a turnover machine either. At worst, this is a push.
I don't know it really hurts us but I'm not sure it helps much. Painter has been saying for months that we needed help in the portal I think people were hoping we'd get an upgrade at the point guard position. If you look at Jenkin's stats alone, he appears to be a shorter version of Newman. He's a three point specialist. His 2 point shooting percentage and his assist totals are sub par.

Certainly can't hurt to have some depth because who knows how Newman will respond this year but this addition doesn't appear to give us the boost we need to compete for a B1G title and it most certainly would appear that we're done as far as the transfer portal goes. I think that's were the disappointment comes from.
 
  • Like
Reactions: purduepat1969

SCBoiler1

Redshirt Freshman
Feb 10, 2014
1,178
1,633
113
Maybe I am. But Hunter was always planned to leave after 2021-22 season. It shouldn't have been a surprise. Certainly not to the extent that you take zero guards in the 2021 class, while the only guards from the 2020 class are (1) a known flight risk and (2) a non-traditional point guard. When that non-traditional guard finds his pace more suited to defending the 3 spot, then you go from slim depth to none very quickly.

I still see people rolling out projected BIG lineups even though for years now Painter has gone almost exclusively with 3-guard lineups. But I understand where they are coming from, because when you break down the roster, it appears by our recruiting we were counting on some forwards playing the 3 and some wings being legit 1 or 2 guards. The imbalance is how you end up with 2-3 scholarship players sitting and watching while there are legitimate skill gaps on the roster.

Let me ask this. Where does Waddell fit into the rotation this year? He was added to the 2021 class AFTER Furst and TKR were in the fold. Was he a 'take'? Either in hindsight or foresight. Nothing against the guy, but could that spot not have been used more effectively on a 3-star combo guard with some quickness and ball handling skills? To me, the composition of that 2021 class looks different from a skills perspective if you are planning to run a 3 guard lineup out there every game.
I like this. For fun lets take Purdue's roster and layout the best position for each player regardless of need. I'll take a shot:

Natural Position:
1) Smith
2) Jenkins, Newman, Loyer
3) Heide, Waddell, Morton
4) Gillis, TKR, Furst
5) Edey, Berg

It could be argued 3 of our best 5 players natural position is the 4 and we have one freshman point guard. In Purdue's offense the two and three are pretty interchangeable but the difference between what is asked of lets say the 3 and 4 or the 1 and 2 are pretty significant IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: boilerball2021

boilerball2021

Redshirt Freshman
Gold Member
Jul 29, 2021
1,355
825
113
Our prospects do not hang on Newman's play. We have more than enough other talent to construct a winning season and a top five BIG finish. I think you are not a supporter of Matt Painter and have decided to fill this summer with lots of chicken little posts. I wish you would approach the team and this board with a more positive perspective. You would think after the success we have had over the last 5-10 years you would get it.
If Newman doesn’t contribute this year, there is zero chance we are a top 5 team in the Big Ten.

Im a big CMP fan. I was a huge fan of last year’s team. That doesn’t mean I look at everything with black and gold glasses like you.

For me, my hope for the team is not to have the success we’ve had the last 5-10 years. My hope would be that we improve upon it and become a top team in the nation. I believe Painter can get us there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mathboy