Who were Painter's top undiscovered gems?

[SnowLeopard]

Kramer comes to mind, as a 2 star recruit
Lewis Jackson
Dakota Mathias could be another 3 star recruit who makes an All BIG team before he's done
PJ is another who has performed beyond expectations

This incoming class is full of such prospects - Wheeler, Ewing, Haarms, are all unheralded prospects with big upsides

I don't think Painter has yet to put a 3 or fewer star recruit into the NBA

Maybe this will change

 

[reswat]

I think Carson Edwards falls into this category

 

[HomelessHarvey97]

I think Carson Edwards falls into this category

I agree with this. He ultimately was a top 100 guy -- but not when Painter got the commitment.

 

[njm8845]

I agree with this. He ultimately was a top 100 guy -- but not when Painter got the commitment.

I don't think we should consider players who have only played one season.

After one season, RJ was projected to be the best PG in Purdue's history.

Kramer has to be at the top of the list. 2 time DPOY, 3 time captain

 

[takedownboiler]

Mitch McGary. Painter was on him as a freshman with an offer. He didn't blow up until way late in his recruitment. I know he had bad grades but that wasn't the reason ppl didn't come until late in the game.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Kramer comes to mind, as a 2 star recruit
Lewis Jackson
Dakota Mathias could be another 3 star recruit who makes an All BIG team before he's done
PJ is another who has performed beyond expectations

This incoming class is full of such prospects - Wheeler, Ewing, Haarms, are all unheralded prospects with big upsides

I don't think Painter has yet to put a 3 or fewer star recruit into the NBA

Maybe this will change

Gordon Hayward. CMP told him as a HS junior that he thought he would be in the NBA. No other P5 type schools had offered him, but unfortunately Brad Stevens saw the same thing.

 

[jadeezra]

After one season, RJ was projected to be the best PG in Purdue's history.

By who lol ? I don't recall any of that

 

[JohnHoosierr]

Painter doesnt really have any unheralded guys that blew up to become a star like a oladipi or burke. Carsen possibly could be that, maybe wheeler could be with his athleticism and length.

 

[jadeezra]

Gordon Hayward. CMP told him as a HS junior that he thought he would be in the NBA. No other P5 type schools had offered him, but unfortunately Brad Stevens saw the same thing.

If Painter had truly thought this he would have been wearing a Purdue jersey

But I remember the story

 

[takedownboiler]

If Painter had truly thought this he would have been wearing a Purdue jersey

But I remember the story

Hayward is on record saying if Purdue didn't have two guys(Hummel and Martin) that he would have committed to Purdue. Bc both were the same type of player he was. Martin cost us big time taking and wasting a scholarship. We would have gotten Teague with his scholarship the. The next year Hayward would have came to join Hummel.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

If Painter had truly thought this he would have been wearing a Purdue jersey

But I remember the story

It is true. He simply preferred the situation at Butler.

 

[buffboiler]

The next year Hayward would have came to join Hummel.

I thought they (Hayward and Hummel) were on the same year. No?

 

[icewind7]

Time frame is from commitment to PU - graduation from PU

how would you define undiscovered gems?

1) from 2 star during commitment to playing like a 3 star before graduation
2) from 2 stars .. to .. 4 stars ..
3) from 2 stars .. to .. 5 stars ..
4) from 3 stars .. to .. 4 stars ..
5) from 3 stars .. to .. 5 stars ..
6) from 4 stars .. to .. 5 stars ..

There may be only a few players falling into category # 1 or #4 under Coach Painter

 

[jadeezra]

Hayward is on record saying if Purdue didn't have two guys(Hummel and Martin) that he would have committed to Purdue. Bc both were the same type of player he was. Martin cost us big time taking and wasting a scholarship. We would have gotten Teague with his scholarship the. The next year Hayward would have came to join Hummel.

Well I specifically remember on cbs them saying Painter told him there wasn't time for both engineering and basketball at Purdue.

Part of me wants to believe what your saying . I just don't think Painter thought he was as good as what he turned out to be. I guess how good Painter thought he was , is debatable

 

[Cevol03]

I always thought Barlow was a good find...too bad he was such an idiot.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

Well I specifically remember on cbs them saying Painter told him there wasn't time for both engineering and basketball at Purdue.

Part of me wants to believe what your saying . I just don't think Painter thought he was as good as what he turned out to be. I guess how good Painter thought he was , is debatable

Don't get me wrong: painter never told him he would be making $30 million a year in the NBA, he just told him he thought he would be in the NBA. Big difference.

And he definitely did discourage Gordon from majoring in pharmacy.

 

[New Pal Boiler]

I thought they (Hayward and Hummel) were on the same year. No?

Hummel was 2007, Hayward was 2008.

 

[lbodel]

Kramer comes to mind, as a 2 star recruit
Lewis Jackson
Dakota Mathias could be another 3 star recruit who makes an All BIG team before he's done
PJ is another who has performed beyond expectations

This incoming class is full of such prospects - Wheeler, Ewing, Haarms, are all unheralded prospects with big upsides

I don't think Painter has yet to put a 3 or fewer star recruit into the NBA

Maybe this will change

Hard to define these. Keep in mind Vince wasn't a top 100 recruit - and was 3 stars.

 

[takedownboiler]

I thought they (Hayward and Hummel) were on the same year. No?

No they were different years. GH didn't commit bc Purdue had Hummel and Martin. No Martin and we get Teague in 07' and GH in 08'.

 

[nagemj02]

No they were different years. GH didn't commit bc Purdue had Hummel and Martin. No Martin and we get Teague in 07' and GH in 08'.

Jeff Teague said on Dakich's radio show awhile ago that Painter didn't offer him. As New Pal Boiler stated, there is a story about Painter going out to dinner with Gordon Hayward (I think Hayward's parents were there as well) and that some of his blunt statements made (including the aforementioned one basically telling Hayward not to go into a pharmacy major if he chose Purdue) might have rubbed him and his parents the wrong way.

 

[takedownboiler]

Jeff Teague said on Dakich's radio show awhile ago that Painter didn't offer him. As New Pal Boiler stated, there is a story about Painter going out to dinner with Gordon Hayward (I think Hayward's parents were there as well) and that some of his blunt statements made (including the aforementioned one basically telling Hayward not to go into a pharmacy major if he chose Purdue) might have rubbed him and his parents the wrong way.

Teague never got an offer bc we didn't have one to give.

 

[nagemj02]

Teague never got an offer bc we didn't have one to give.

Well, according to Teague on Dakich's radio show, he was interested in Purdue and Painter turned him down. Teague made it sound like this happened before Scott Martin committed.

 

[Ben Richart]

Kramer comes to mind, as a 2 star recruit
Lewis Jackson
Dakota Mathias could be another 3 star recruit who makes an All BIG team before he's done
PJ is another who has performed beyond expectations

This incoming class is full of such prospects - Wheeler, Ewing, Haarms, are all unheralded prospects with big upsides

I don't think Painter has yet to put a 3 or fewer star recruit into the NBA

Maybe this will change

it's not a bad thing not to have NBA guys. the longer they stay, the better. unless Painter goes Caliparian on us.

 

[BoilerBiker]

And he definitely did discourage Gordon from majoring in pharmacy.

when carsen edwards committed, he and his coach talked about engineering being an important academic factor.

his major is now OLS

 

[njm8845]

it's not a bad thing not to have NBA guys. the longer they stay, the better. unless Painter goes Caliparian on us.

Completely disagree. It is bad not to have nba talent. I think you need one nba type player in each class.

You need this for deep runs in March. Talent wins more often than not.

You also need it for future recruits. Players always want to go on to play at the highest level, so having a history of success of getting players to the nba is crucial to attracting future top talent.

 

[njm8845]

when carsen edwards committed, he and his coach talked about engineering being an important academic factor.

his major is now OLS

I believe haas talked about engineering when he committed also.

I doubt this is painter encouraging an easier major...more likely the player discovered that school is really tough.

I knew lots of people in high school who talked of engineering, med school, etc...plans change and goals aren't always fulfilled

 

[njm8845]

After one season, RJ was projected to be the best PG in Purdue's history.

By who lol ? I don't recall any of that

Painter himself. Said something like "he has chance to be best ever at Purdue"

Go back and look at his freshman stats....they are better than carsen's.

Just saying that's why we shouldn't consider Carsen in this thread.

 

[bonefish1]

it's not a bad thing not to have NBA guys. the longer they stay, the better. unless Painter goes Caliparian on us.

The simple fact of the matter is you have to have some NBA talent on the roster to make deep runs in the tourney. Particularly at the guard position.
PU has 2 guys in the front court with NBA potential (Biggie, Haas and Vince (slight chance) but none in the backcourt (possible CE but that's YTD).

 

[lbodel]

The simple fact of the matter is you have to have some NBA talent on the roster to make deep runs in the tourney. Particularly at the guard position.
PU has 2 guys in the front court with NBA potential (Biggie, Haas and Vince (slight chance) but none in the backcourt (possible CE but that's YTD).

I wish people would stop making these general/vague rules statements. First off, what's a deep run? Elite 8? For several years, people moaned and complained that we didn't have any big guys. Now we do and suddenly that doesn't matter and we only need good guards. South Carolina isn't some loaded team - they have one guy projected in the second round. Gonzaga's center is projected in the first round and they have one guy projected in the second round. Both of those are Final Four teams.

As for NBA guards, North Carolina won the national championship and has three players - none of them guards - that are in the NBA draft projections. Arizona has 3 players projected in the NBA draft - two of them guards - and made it to the Sweet 16 like us.

The fact of the matter is that Purdue had the tools to make a "deep run" - but the tournament is about much more than that. We hit Kansas at the wrong time and that's what happens in this tournament - they were a COMPLETELY different team when they played Oregon (and quite frankly, Oregon played very well, but Kansas played poorly on their own merits). And if you look at Oregon's path prior to that game, they played a 7 seed instead of the favored 2 and the 11 seed instead of the 6 seed. If we had that path, I'm pretty confident we would have made the Elite 8 this year.

 

[BoiledSteel]

I wish people would stop making these general/vague rules statements. First off, what's a deep run? Elite 8? For several years, people moaned and complained that we didn't have any big guys. Now we do and suddenly that doesn't matter and we only need good guards. South Carolina isn't some loaded team - they have one guy projected in the second round. Gonzaga's center is projected in the first round and they have one guy projected in the second round. Both of those are Final Four teams.

As for NBA guards, North Carolina won the national championship and has three players - none of them guards - that are in the NBA draft projections. Arizona has 3 players projected in the NBA draft - two of them guards - and made it to the Sweet 16 like us.

The fact of the matter is that Purdue had the tools to make a "deep run" - but the tournament is about much more than that. We hit Kansas at the wrong time and that's what happens in this tournament - they were a COMPLETELY different team when they played Oregon (and quite frankly, Oregon played very well, but Kansas played poorly on their own merits). And if you look at Oregon's path prior to that game, they played a 7 seed instead of the favored 2 and the 11 seed instead of the 6 seed. If we had that path, I'm pretty confident we would have made the Elite 8 this year.

Excellent post and very correct. It should be put as a sticky at the top somewhere for reference. The amount of changing the so called 'experts' do on here will make your head spin.

 

[bonefish1]

I wish people would stop making these general/vague rules statements. First off, what's a deep run? Elite 8? For several years, people moaned and complained that we didn't have any big guys. Now we do and suddenly that doesn't matter and we only need good guards. South Carolina isn't some loaded team - they have one guy projected in the second round. Gonzaga's center is projected in the first round and they have one guy projected in the second round. Both of those are Final Four teams.

As for NBA guards, North Carolina won the national championship and has three players - none of them guards - that are in the NBA draft projections. Arizona has 3 players projected in the NBA draft - two of them guards - and made it to the Sweet 16 like us.

The fact of the matter is that Purdue had the tools to make a "deep run" - but the tournament is about much more than that. We hit Kansas at the wrong time and that's what happens in this tournament - they were a COMPLETELY different team when they played Oregon (and quite frankly, Oregon played very well, but Kansas played poorly on their own merits). And if you look at Oregon's path prior to that game, they played a 7 seed instead of the favored 2 and the 11 seed instead of the 6 seed. If we had that path, I'm pretty confident we would have made the Elite 8 this year.

Purdue, nationally considered a really good basketball program, not a blue blood program (there are only 4-5 of those), but a really good, solid program, winning the most B10 conference championships, hasn't been to the FF in 38 years!
As someone mentioned earlier, 51 other programs have been there in that time including a vast majority of the B10.
Some people will say "oh, that's just bad luck, injuries to key players, bad draw," etc.
Others might find a common denominator over that time frame.
I'll continue to argue it's the lack of NBA guard talent that's been the problem.

 

[BoiledSteel]

I'll continue to argue it's the lack of NBA guard talent that's been the problem.

And you will continue to be wrong.

 

[Purdue0034]

Painter himself. Said something like "he has chance to be best ever at Purdue"

Go back and look at his freshman stats....they are better than carsen's.

Just saying that's why we shouldn't consider Carsen in this thread.

This is a false statement and not even debatable. Carsen's freshman stats are better than RJ's. Here is a summary: Total points scored: Carsen, 360, RJ 350, 3 point percentage: Carsen 34%, RJ 16.7%, 3 Pointers Made: Carsen 49, RJ 6, Total steals: Carsen 37, RJ 33, Free throw percentage: Carsen 72.4%, RJ 59.6 %, Turnovers: Carsen 1.8/game, RJ 2.6/game. Scoring average: Carsen 10.3 pts/game, RJ 10.3 pts/game, Minutes played: Carsen 813, RJ 1060. So just doing the math, if Carsen played as many minutes he would be averaging about 14 points a game. Carsen also had a better offensive rating and a better defensive rating than RJ during their freshman campaigns.

 

[SIBoiler2]

I don't think we should consider players who have only played one season.

After one season, RJ was projected to be the best PG in Purdue's history.

Kramer has to be at the top of the list. 2 time DPOY, 3 time captain

RJ is still the best PG in history ............ in his own mind!!!

 

[SIBoiler2]

when carsen edwards committed, he and his coach talked about engineering being an important academic factor.

his major is now OLS

Not a big deal. Lots of non-athletes think engineering is a great major until they spend a semester or two in the school of engineering.

 

[klmLB]

The fact of the matter is that Purdue had the tools to make a "deep run" - but the tournament is about much more than that. We hit Kansas at the wrong time and that's what happens in this tournament - they were a COMPLETELY different team when they played Oregon (and quite frankly, Oregon played very well, but Kansas played poorly on their own merits). And if you look at Oregon's path prior to that game, they played a 7 seed instead of the favored 2 and the 11 seed instead of the 6 seed. If we had that path, I'm pretty confident we would have made the Elite 8 this year.

I agree with most of your post except, in my opinion, this year's squad did not have the tools to be a Final Four team and the weakness was with the lack of athleticism at the guard spot. We were a team with a high floor but a Sweet Sixteen ceiling. I agree that while very nice to have, I do not think Purdue needs NBA guards to make the F4. By some miracle getting by a Kansas, we would have lost to Oregon. We need quicker guards who are borderline NBA guys. Both Gonzaga and SC had superior quickness at the guard spot to Purdue. While North Carolina may not have a bonafide NBA guard, Berry is a great college guard whose NBA ceiling is limited due to his size.

I'd like to add some thoughts to the Kansas / Oregon content. To me, it wasn't just an off night for Kansas and they were super ON against us. It comes down to defensive pressure and disrupting Kansas' offense. We didn't disrupt anything against Kansas and Oregon's guards did.

This is all due to a of lack of quickness at guard spot and no rim protection. We could have played Kansas 10 times are we would have lost 9. Kansas' offense was *initiated* with guard dribble penetration. Their dribble penetration led to defensive rotations. Kansas would get an opportunity mid-range or at the hoop or kickouts for wide open, in-rhythm jump shots (and Kansas is a good shooting team).

The Oregon/Kansas game was quite different from our game, but it wasn't a coincidence or just an off night for Kansas. Oregon's guards (Brooks, Dorsey, Ennis) were very athletic and Kansas did not get any space or advantage from dribble penetration. Also, Oregon pressured well past the 3 point line, so there were almost no open, in-rhythm shots from the perimeter. Even in the off chance that they had an open look, they were so pressured throughout the game, their timing was off, thus missing open looks. If by chance, Kansas got Oregon in a defensive rotation, Bell down low cleaned it up at the rim.

In our game against Kansas, their guards roamed free whenever and where ever they wanted. The ball movement led to in-rhythm shots or opportunities at the rim. They, as a team, were entirely too comfortable running their offense and that is why they put up the numbers they did. It wasn't a fluke.

 

[bonefish1]

And you will continue to be wrong.

I'm just curious, how long have you followed Purdue basketball?

If you don't think it's guard play, what it is?

Do you also believe the Cubs didn't win a WS for over 100 years because of bad luck and weird curses?

 

[BoilerBiker]

Not a big deal. Lots of non-athletes think engineering is a great major until they spend a semester or two in the school of engineering.

I didnt realize he actually enrolled in Engr and later changed.
just assumed he went with OLS from the start, after being advised

 

[BoilerStation]

I agree with most of your post except, in my opinion, this year's squad did not have the tools to be a Final Four team and the weakness was with the lack of athleticism at the guard spot. We were a team with a high floor but a Sweet Sixteen ceiling. I agree that while very nice to have, I do not think Purdue needs NBA guards to make the F4. By some miracle getting by a Kansas, we would have lost to Oregon. We need quicker guards who are borderline NBA guys. Both Gonzaga and SC had superior quickness at the guard spot to Purdue. While North Carolina may not have a bonafide NBA guard, Berry is a great college guard whose NBA ceiling is limited due to his size.

I'd like to add some thoughts to the Kansas / Oregon content. To me, it wasn't just an off night for Kansas and they were super ON against us. It comes down to defensive pressure and disrupting Kansas' offense. We didn't disrupt anything against Kansas and Oregon's guards did.

This is all due to a of lack of quickness at guard spot and no rim protection. We could have played Kansas 10 times are we would have lost 9. Kansas' offense was *initiated* with guard dribble penetration. Their dribble penetration led to defensive rotations. Kansas would get an opportunity mid-range or at the hoop or kickouts for wide open, in-rhythm jump shots (and Kansas is a good shooting team).

The Oregon/Kansas game was quite different from our game, but it wasn't a coincidence or just an off night for Kansas. Oregon's guards (Brooks, Dorsey, Ennis) were very athletic and Kansas did not get any space or advantage from dribble penetration. Also, Oregon pressured well past the 3 point line, so there were almost no open, in-rhythm shots from the perimeter. Even in the off chance that they had an open look, they were so pressured throughout the game, their timing was off, thus missing open looks. If by chance, Kansas got Oregon in a defensive rotation, Bell down low cleaned it up at the rim.

In our game against Kansas, their guards roamed free whenever and where ever they wanted. The ball movement led to in-rhythm shots or opportunities at the rim. They, as a team, were entirely too comfortable running their offense and that is why they put up the numbers they did. It wasn't a fluke.

Yup stopped reading after you said we had a sweet 16 ceiling.

 

[PUBV]

Excellent post and very correct. It should be put as a sticky at the top somewhere for reference. The amount of changing the so called 'experts' do on here will make your head spin.

Yes, better yet we should make a huge banner and hang it in Mackey that says
"Played 'em at the wrong time/Ran into a buzzsaw/They had an easier draw than us"
What complete whiny bs from the "experts"