Very telling quote from Spike....

[bonefish1]

"Purdue really gets after it and they're blue-collar and coming from Michigan, it's more offensive-minded."

I think this perception of Purdue from an outsider, particularly at the PG position, has held PU back over the years in terms of some of the players they've been able to recruit. I'm sure this perception is used negatively by other coaches in recruiting, especially the guard position.

I'm not sure that will change until you get totally new blood in the system with the new AD.

 

[lbodel]

"Purdue really gets after it and they're blue-collar and coming from Michigan, it's more offensive-minded."

I think this perception of Purdue from an outsider, particularly at the PG position, has held PU back over the years in terms of some of the players they've been able to recruit. I'm sure this perception is used negatively by other coaches in recruiting, especially the guard position.

I'm not sure that will change until you get totally new blood in the system with the new AD.

I think the perception is more on this board than anything...

 

[PurdueCF12]

Funny thing about perception:

Scoring Offense:
4. Purdue - 75.7
6. Michigan - 71.7

Field Goal Percentage:
3. Purdue - .468
5. Michigan - .448

3-Point Percentage
3. Purdue - .383
6. Michigan - .369

Assists
2. Purdue - 16.9
6. Michigan - 13.6

Only spot they got us was 3-pointers made
3. Michigan - 9.1
8. Purdue - 7.1

KenPom tempo:
194. Purdue
299. Michigan

We were fifth in tempo in the Big Ten (Rutgers, Iowa, Minnesota, Indiana).

 

[bonefish1]

I'm not talking about 1 year.....I'm talking about over a significant period of time. The last 10-20 years, going back to the early Keady days.
Even during TV broadcasts, the commentators talk about the defensive, blue collar mentality of the program, hell, even the Paint Crew has the 'Defense Lives Here' sign.

Kind of like Purdue football and the 'Cradle of QBs'. Even though we haven't had a QB worth a $hit in about 6 years, the reputation is that Purdue still loves the QB position.

 

[PurdueCF12]

You're gonna make me go back further huh? (NOTE: Just using Michigan, because people think they play faster).

2015 KenPom Tempo
164. Purdue (7th in Big Ten; Michigan was 340th nationally BTW)

2014
59. Purdue (2nd in Big Ten; Michigan 334th)

2013
119. Purdue (3rd in Big Ten; Michigan 210th)

2012
206. Purdue (5th in Big Ten; Michigan 329th)

2011
148. Purdue (2nd in Big Ten; Michigan 323rd)

2010
162. Purdue (3rd in Big Ten; Michigan 320th)

2009
146. Purdue (Michigan 279th)

2008
112. Purdue (Michigan 189th)

2007
123. Purdue (Michigan 269th)

Even during Keady in 2002, we were 168th, while Michigan was 261st.

But I don't think we need to go back to the Keady days. That was 14 years ago, and the current recruits were like three and four years old.

Yes, we do love the blue-collar mentality, but the team is much more well-rounded than you think. Is it a bad thing? Virginia, Wisconsin, Syracuse fans don't really seem to mind when announcers and fans talk about their defense being their calling card.

The Paint Crew also has 3-point signs too....

 

[BBG]

I think the perception is more on this board than anything...

This. A million times this.

 

[mathboy]

When we are good, we tend to be good both offensively and defensively. I don't see one favored over the other. IIRC, the baby boilers lead the BIG in offense, so this is not a one-time, one-season tendency.

Yes, because we do practice defense strongly, we get known for that, but we are also a very good offensive team. However, I am sure that any negative perception will and has been used against us.

There are some coaches out there that work very hard at negatively recruiting against us, even when it is a player we have little interest in. Those coaches hope to create a "truth" where none exists. Stalin said if you tell a lie enough times, people will believe it is true. Don't be one of those people. Just lean on the facts.

 

[PurdueCF12]

When we are good, we tend to be good both offensively and defensively. I don't see one favored over the other. IIRC, the baby boilers lead the BIG in offense, so this is not a one-time, one-season tendency.

Yes, because we do practice defense strongly, we get known for that, but we are also a very good offensive team. However, I am sure that any negative perception will and has been used against us.

There are some coaches out there that work very hard at negatively recruiting against us, even when it is a player we have little interest in. Those coaches hope to create a "truth" where none exists. Stalin said if you tell a lie enough times, people will believe it is true. Don't be one of those people. Just lean on the facts.

I'm pretty sure the Purdue coaches actively are dissuading that with own facts.

 

[bonefish1]

There's a saying that "perception is reality". It doesn't matter what the facts or statistics say, and once you develop a reputation, that reputation is difficult to shake, not matter how hard you try.
You can point to offensive efficiency numbers and such, but we all know those can be spun a number of ways.

I'll continue to believe that this is the reason Purdue hasn't been able to recruit great point guards, and as a result, is a poor tournament team.

 

[indianphil]

"Purdue really gets after it and they're blue-collar and coming from Michigan, it's more offensive-minded."

I think this perception of Purdue from an outsider, particularly at the PG position, has held PU back over the years in terms of some of the players they've been able to recruit. I'm sure this perception is used negatively by other coaches in recruiting, especially the guard position.

I'm not sure that will change until you get totally new blood in the system with the new AD.

Perception is what it is...how another person sees it. Kids want to play offense, so other coaches preach how Purdue pushes defense at the cost of offense in recruiting to influence a kid. Listen to the news everyday and absorb what the mainline news is doing to Trump. FWIW, Golden State is really beating Cleveland right now because they play a little defense and Cleveland cant spell the word. These are supposed to be the best players in the world?

Spike cant tell you that Michigan didnt spend a lot of time on defense while he was up there.

 

[PU52Chevy]

I'm not talking about 1 year.....I'm talking about over a significant period of time. The last 10-20 years, going back to the early Keady days.
Even during TV broadcasts, the commentators talk about the defensive, blue collar mentality of the program, hell, even the Paint Crew has the 'Defense Lives Here' sign.

Kind of like Purdue football and the 'Cradle of QBs'. Even though we haven't had a QB worth a $hit in about 6 years, the reputation is that Purdue still loves the QB position.

I bet and feel Appleby and possibly Etling will both be pro's someday. Heck we have Brees, C. Painter and Elliot now in the league....

Blough and Sindelar both have good shots and talented enough to be pro's......

Someone needs to look at things more positive.

 

[PU52Chevy]

I agree perception is not always the final result.

Just win......Painter has said he is trying to be more open on offense and run and gun....

but I think to be a consistent top 20 program you need to have a great defense.

Once we can put together the talent that doesn't mind being a team we will win National titles.

Getting 4 and 5 star kids to play as a team no matter the minutes is how Duke, Kentucky, Kansas and UNC do it......

I believe someday we will....we are already in the tops of the Big Ten...next step is national.

Boiler Up! and always 110% positive.

 

[bonefish1]

Perception is what it is...how another person sees it. Kids want to play offense, so other coaches preach how Purdue pushes defense at the cost of offense in recruiting to influence a kid. Listen to the news everyday and absorb what the mainline news is doing to Trump. FWIW, Golden State is really beating Cleveland right now because they play a little defense and Cleveland cant spell the word. These are supposed to be the best players in the world?

Spike cant tell you that Michigan didnt spend a lot of time on defense while he was up there.

The NBA is geared towards offense, not defense. Most of the D played in the NBA would have a guy fouled out in the first 5 minutes in college. The owners, fans, (refs) and players know that offense sells and is how they make money and therefore, they let the reaching/grabbing/hacking go uncalled.
It's not hard for that mentality to trickle down to the college game. I'm not saying, 'don't play any D', but your Top 50 or 100 recruits who might have realistic expectations of getting to the NBA know they're going to get there more based on offense than defense.
You can bet that some NBA coaches love that AJ can protect the rim and block shots, but they love him even more for that fact that he can pick n pop the 18-20 footer.

 

[nat100]

I bet and feel Appleby and possibly Etling will both be pro's someday. Heck we have Brees, C. Painter and Elliot now in the league....

Blough and Sindelar both have good shots and talented enough to be pro's......

Someone needs to look at things more positive.

Painter isnt in the league anymore. Elliott is a scout.

 

[lbodel]

I'm not talking about 1 year.....I'm talking about over a significant period of time. The last 10-20 years, going back to the early Keady days.
Even during TV broadcasts, the commentators talk about the defensive, blue collar mentality of the program, hell, even the Paint Crew has the 'Defense Lives Here' sign.

Kind of like Purdue football and the 'Cradle of QBs'. Even though we haven't had a QB worth a $hit in about 6 years, the reputation is that Purdue still loves the QB position.

But again, just because you play hard, work hard, take pride in your defense - doesn't mean you can't have offense. Look at Villanova this year.

 

[bonefish1]

But again, just because you play hard, work hard, take pride in your defense - doesn't mean you can't have offense. Look at Villanova this year.

Nothing wrong with playing tough D, having pride in your D, etc, just not sure that's what you want your reputation to be based on when the game is now clearly focused on offense and players with expectations of playing at the next level want to play someplace that is more offensively minded (again, whether real or perceived). I'm sure Painter addresses this during his recruiting visits and does a good job of mitigating that when it comes up as a negative. But, when it comes down to the time for the kid to make a decision, I'm sure it has some impact.

For example, Wisky will probably be known for a long time at a program that wants to play a minimal possession game and keep the scores in the 50's.
BYU football will be known as a program that wants to throw for 500 yards a game.
Nebraska football will be know for a team with a great tailback and a dual threat QB who's a better runner than thrower.

 

[BBG]

Nothing wrong with playing tough D, having pride in your D, etc, just not sure that's what you want your reputation to be based on when the game is now clearly focused on offense and players with expectations of playing at the next level want to play someplace that is more offensively minded (again, whether real or perceived). I'm sure Painter addresses this during his recruiting visits and does a good job of mitigating that when it comes up as a negative. But, when it comes down to the time for the kid to make a decision, I'm sure it has some impact.

For example, Wisky will probably be known for a long time at a program that wants to play a minimal possession game and keep the scores in the 50's.
BYU football will be known as a program that wants to throw for 500 yards a game.
Nebraska football will be know for a team with a great tailback and a dual threat QB who's a better runner than thrower.

I think there are two different "perceptions" going on here. 1) the PG position at Purdue and it's "perception" (which is false BTW) and 2) Purdue basketball being defensive first.

As I said, the first one I think is false (and was proven that way when I used to think we had more of an defensive focus at the PG position) and being spread by either former PGs with a grudge or opposing coaches.

As far as being known for defense, that is absolutely true because in the past during games you heard announcers make mention of it and it is far from a bad thing. However, it has recently turned in to a more offensive game, you are correct and it will take time for Purdue and other schools that were defensive minded to change that perception. I mean there are signs that read "defense lives here" so there is most certainly the perception we are a defensive minded program.

Now, in regard to it making an impact, I don't think it does and here is why... by the time a kid makes a decision he has already talked to the coaches and voiced his concerns as far as offense goes and the coaching staff can ease his fears in terms of offense and show him numbers if he wants from last year where we most certainly were an offensive team. I believe our stats were "better" on the offensive side as opposed to defense as well. So to me that shows that there is a emphasis on putting up more numbers as opposed to defensive stops.

Look at our potential lineups for next year, that seems rather offense first as opposed to defense to me. But that is just my perception .

 

[BoilerDaddy]

Funny thing about perception:

Scoring Offense:
4. Purdue - 75.7
6. Michigan - 71.7

Field Goal Percentage:
3. Purdue - .468
5. Michigan - .448

3-Point Percentage
3. Purdue - .383
6. Michigan - .369

Assists
2. Purdue - 16.9
6. Michigan - 13.6

Only spot they got us was 3-pointers made
3. Michigan - 9.1
8. Purdue - 7.1

KenPom tempo:
194. Purdue
299. Michigan

We were fifth in tempo in the Big Ten (Rutgers, Iowa, Minnesota, Indiana).

I think that in this coming season Purdue's offense will be much better than its defense.

That said, I think that having a brand that recruits associate with Purdue is a good thing, even if it doesn't completely match reality.

 

[proudopete]

I'm not talking about 1 year.....I'm talking about over a significant period of time. The last 10-20 years, going back to the early Keady days.
Even during TV broadcasts, the commentators talk about the defensive, blue collar mentality of the program, hell, even the Paint Crew has the 'Defense Lives Here' sign.

Kind of like Purdue football and the 'Cradle of QBs'. Even though we haven't had a QB worth a $hit in about 6 years, the reputation is that Purdue still loves the QB position.

Our offense is built around getting clean looks. Taking care of the ball and working to get the high percentage shot. It's funny how that seems to be the wining formula for many of the best teams in college and pro but for some reason it's a hinderance in some Purdue fans minds.

 

[bonefish1]

I think that in this coming season Purdue's offense will be much better than its defense.

That said, I think that having a brand that recruits associate with Purdue is a good thing, even if it doesn't completely match reality.

I disagree that the 'brand' associated with PU, if it's 'defense first' is a positive. Most, not all, but most kids these days, especially the top talent, are offensively minded. They know they need to be able to score, create, etc to make it to the NBA. Very few players make it to the NBA because they're better defensively than offensively.
Take Chris Kramer. If the NBA valued D and wanted a stopper, he would be in the league. But, the problem is, the team would be playing 4 on 5 offensively with him on the floor.

 

[bonefish1]

I think there are two different "perceptions" going on here. 1) the PG position at Purdue and it's "perception" (which is false BTW) and 2) Purdue basketball being defensive first.

As I said, the first one I think is false (and was proven that way when I used to think we had more of an defensive focus at the PG position) and being spread by either former PGs with a grudge or opposing coaches.

As far as being known for defense, that is absolutely true because in the past during games you heard announcers make mention of it and it is far from a bad thing. However, it has recently turned in to a more offensive game, you are correct and it will take time for Purdue and other schools that were defensive minded to change that perception. I mean there are signs that read "defense lives here" so there is most certainly the perception we are a defensive minded program.

Now, in regard to it making an impact, I don't think it does and here is why... by the time a kid makes a decision he has already talked to the coaches and voiced his concerns as far as offense goes and the coaching staff can ease his fears in terms of offense and show him numbers if he wants from last year where we most certainly were an offensive team. I believe our stats were "better" on the offensive side as opposed to defense as well. So to me that shows that there is a emphasis on putting up more numbers as opposed to defensive stops.

Look at our potential lineups for next year, that seems rather offense first as opposed to defense to me. But that is just my perception .

Why do you think the PG position at PU isn't/hasn't been a problem? It's generally been the weak spot since the early Keady days. PU has put zero PGs in the NBA in 20 years. They also haven't make a final four in 35 years. Correlation? I believe so.

 

[proudopete]

I disagree that the 'brand' associated with PU, if it's 'defense first' is a positive. Most, not all, but most kids these days, especially the top talent, are offensively minded. They know they need to be able to score, create, etc to make it to the NBA. Very few players make it to the NBA because they're better defensively than offensively.
Take Chris Kramer. If the NBA valued D and wanted a stopper, he would be in the league. But, the problem is, the team would be playing 4 on 5 offensively with him on the floor.

Brian Cardinal says hello.

 

[bonefish1]

Our offense is built around getting clean looks. Taking care of the ball and working to get the high percentage shot. It's funny how that seems to be the wining formula for many of the best teams in college and pro but for some reason it's a hinderance in some Purdue fans minds.

Every single coach in D1 basketball has that as their offensive philosophy, it's not unique to Purdue. What coach doesn't want low turnovers and high percentage shots?
However, IMHO, at the most important position on the floor (PG), Purdue's philosophy is for the PG to be the distributor and to feed the post, it's not necessarily to create, or score first. Obviously that's got a lot to due with the talent, but that's a function of recruiting.

 

[bonefish1]

Brian Cardinal says hello.

Did BC get us to a FF? Thanks.

 

[FirstDownB]

"Purdue really gets after it and they're blue-collar and coming from Michigan, it's more offensive-minded."

I think this perception of Purdue from an outsider, particularly at the PG position, has held PU back over the years in terms of some of the players they've been able to recruit. I'm sure this perception is used negatively by other coaches in recruiting, especially the guard position.

I'm not sure that will change until you get totally new blood in the system with the new AD.

I think there might be some merit to the argument that there is diminishing returns at some level of defensive intensity/effort and how it effects your team on the offensive end. Particularly on the amateur level as there is a limited number of hours available to practice.
However, I find it interesting that you believe this quote from a player that just chose to transfer to Purdue somehow proves it is a deterrent to recruiting.

 

[JohnHoosierr]

I bet and feel Appleby and possibly Etling will both be pro's someday. Heck we have Brees, C. Painter and Elliot now in the league....

Blough and Sindelar both have good shots and talented enough to be pro's......

Someone needs to look at things more positive.

What a delusional post that isn't even close to being correct.

 

[proudopete]

Did BC get us to a FF? Thanks.

You didn't say a word about the final four in your post. You said "if the NBA valued defense".
Keep spinning away and moving the goalposts. I am sure Painter tells his guys to forget about scoring and focus only on defense as your premise seems to state.
We have had our share of NBA guys and good offensive players at our defense lives here program.
I can give you plenty of examples of them as well as guys who are offensive oriented at other programs who won't or haven't played im the league.
The NBA is the best of the best and that means in both ends of the ball. Changing the coach and AD won't change that at all.

 

[JohnHoosierr]

Aj

Brian Cardinal says hello.

Aj Hammons as well. He's being drafted because of how dominant he is defensively. Kramer didn't get drafted because he was a mediocre college player, not because the nba doesn't value defense which is a complete myth.

 

[njm8845]

Why do you think the PG position at PU isn't/hasn't been a problem? It's generally been the weak spot since the early Keady days. PU has put zero PGs in the NBA in 20 years. They also haven't make a final four in 35 years. Correlation? I believe so.

You're saying there's a correlation to having an NBA PG on the roster and making final fours? I'm sure there is a correlation, but I doubt it's any higher than any other position. In fact, I'd say it's lower, as just by looking at NBA point guards, it seems fewer of them made the final four than other positions. Just off the top of my head, it seems like SG or SF has the best correlation with final fours.

 

[TC4THREE]

Every single coach in D1 basketball has that as their offensive philosophy, it's not unique to Purdue. What coach doesn't want low turnovers and high percentage shots?
However, IMHO, at the most important position on the floor (PG), Purdue's philosophy is for the PG to be the distributor and to feed the post, it's not necessarily to create, or score first. Obviously that's got a lot to due with the talent, but that's a function of recruiting.

What coach doesn't want to play good defense?

 

[BBG]

Why do you think the PG position at PU isn't/hasn't been a problem? It's generally been the weak spot since the early Keady days. PU has put zero PGs in the NBA in 20 years. They also haven't make a final four in 35 years. Correlation? I believe so.

Let me clarify my statement, I was referencing the "perception" that PGs at Purdue aren't free to score/create their own shots/etc.

We've had some very good PGs over the years that sure didn't make it in the NBA, but were still very good nonetheless. Last year our weakest spot was hands down the PG position but looking back to our teams that have had the most potential say like the Baby Boilers, PG play wasn't the reason we didn't get that team to a F4.. it was a depth issue. Hummel going down when he did impacted that run more than anything else.

 

[BoilerBF]

You're gonna make me go back further huh? (NOTE: Just using Michigan, because people think they play faster).

2015 KenPom Tempo
164. Purdue (7th in Big Ten; Michigan was 340th nationally BTW)

2014
59. Purdue (2nd in Big Ten; Michigan 334th)

2013
119. Purdue (3rd in Big Ten; Michigan 210th)

2012
206. Purdue (5th in Big Ten; Michigan 329th)

2011
148. Purdue (2nd in Big Ten; Michigan 323rd)

2010
162. Purdue (3rd in Big Ten; Michigan 320th)

2009
146. Purdue (Michigan 279th)

2008
112. Purdue (Michigan 189th)

2007
123. Purdue (Michigan 269th)

Even during Keady in 2002, we were 168th, while Michigan was 261st.

But I don't think we need to go back to the Keady days. That was 14 years ago, and the current recruits were like three and four years old.

Yes, we do love the blue-collar mentality, but the team is much more well-rounded than you think. Is it a bad thing? Virginia, Wisconsin, Syracuse fans don't really seem to mind when announcers and fans talk about their defense being their calling card.

The Paint Crew also has 3-point signs too....

Why introduce facts into the discussion? Are those even allowed?

 

[bonefish1]

You didn't say a word about the final four in your post. You said "if the NBA valued defense".
Keep spinning away and moving the goalposts. I am sure Painter tells his guys to forget about scoring and focus only on defense as your premise seems to state.
We have had our share of NBA guys and good offensive players at our defense lives here program.
I can give you plenty of examples of them as well as guys who are offensive oriented at other programs who won't or haven't played im the league.
The NBA is the best of the best and that means in both ends of the ball. Changing the coach and AD won't change that at all.

Cardinal was probably the exception to the rule. But we can count on about 1 hand the number of Purdue players who have made in the NBA in the last 20 years.
Miller, Cardinal, Moore, Hummel, Landry. Am I missing anyone?

Now granted, we'll probably have 4 in the next 2 years, but only 1 of which is a guard.

 

[TC4THREE]

Cardinal was probably the exception to the rule. But we can count on about 1 hand the number of Purdue players who have made in the NBA in the last 20 years.
Miller, Cardinal, Moore, Hummel, Landry. Am I missing anyone?

Now granted, we'll probably have 4 in the next 2 years, but only 1 of which is a guard.

So you think producing NBA guards should be the top priority of the Purdue basketball program?

 

[bonefish1]

Aj

Aj Hammons as well. He's being drafted because of how dominant he is defensively. Kramer didn't get drafted because he was a mediocre college player, not because the nba doesn't value defense which is a complete myth.

If AJ didn't prove he could hit the 15-20 foot jumper, he'd have a lot tougher time getting drafter.
Kramer was a great college defender, just not a good offensive player. I'll agree with mediocre. Definitely not Big10 starting guard caliber.

 

[bonefish1]

You're saying there's a correlation to having an NBA PG on the roster and making final fours? I'm sure there is a correlation, but I doubt it's any higher than any other position. In fact, I'd say it's lower, as just by looking at NBA point guards, it seems fewer of them made the final four than other positions. Just off the top of my head, it seems like SG or SF has the best correlation with final fours.

I'd disagree. PG is the most important position on the floor and it's even more important in the tourney. If you've watched PU for a long time, you'll know that PG if where the team usually falls apart late in games. Last year being a prime example.
If you were going to build a Final Four ready team, you'd start with the PG position.
I think PG is slightly less important in the NBA because it's so much one on one and individual play. PGs don't need to create because all most everyone in the NBA can create their own shot or have the green light to fire at will.

 

[bonefish1]

So you think producing NBA guards should be the top priority of the Purdue basketball program?

No. I think Final Fours and National Championships should be the top priority of the basketball program. My contention though, is that it's a lot tougher to do those things without periodically having guards good enough to play in the NBA.

 

[Boiler Buck]

I think the perception is more on this board than anything...

Since the Quote was from Spike --- I was not aware he was a board member??

 

[BoilerDaddy]

I disagree that the 'brand' associated with PU, if it's 'defense first' is a positive. Most, not all, but most kids these days, especially the top talent, are offensively minded. They know they need to be able to score, create, etc to make it to the NBA. Very few players make it to the NBA because they're better defensively than offensively.
Take Chris Kramer. If the NBA valued D and wanted a stopper, he would be in the league. But, the problem is, the team would be playing 4 on 5 offensively with him on the floor.

When coaches were surveyed a year ago regarding who the top defensive coaches were, the leading vote getters were Tony Bennett, Rick Pitino, and Tom Izzo. All three have programs that are known for their hard-nosed intense defense and I don't think that the identity hurts them. I also don't believe that being known for defense and good offense are mutually exclusive. It only makes sense to leverage Purdue's defensive reputation while also promoting Purdue's accomplishments on offense.

 

[punaj]

Off topic, but not really... who was the last really good Purdue PG? I think some would say Lewis Jackson. I think he was good, but couldn't really take a game over by himself. My candidate would be Willie Deane. He was fun to watch. Might have even led the conference in scoring one year. Funny to think back that his dad had to persuade Keady to let him walk on. Turned out pretty good for Purdue.

For anyone wanting a little hop back in the time machine, here is an article mentioning the story about his dad and Coach Keady.

http://www.purdueexponent.org/sports/article_e9184ecb-0316-57b8-9896-dbafb0618596.html