Who's the man if we NEED a 3?

[CRBoiler]

Expanding on a reply to a different post...

We need shooters who can hit shots when we REALLY need them: when the score is close (or we're way behind - hasn't happened yet) or when we're struggling to create offense against a zone. Being able to make it rain 3's when we're up 20+ points against a weak team is less valuable. I think these next 3 games may lead to some separation, because those higher pressure scenarios are more likely to occur.
​

If we get into the Butler game, and we NEED a 3, who's got the ball in their hands? IMO it is Ray. He has proven he can make 3's reliably, and he seems the least likely to be thrown off by the emotions that come with pressure. Second choice: Cline, because he is the one shooting specialist so far who has delivered big time when we truly needed it.

 

[delish1]

Expanding on a reply to a different post...

We need shooters who can hit shots when we REALLY need them: when the score is close (or we're way behind - hasn't happened yet) or when we're struggling to create offense against a zone. Being able to make it rain 3's when we're up 20+ points against a weak team is less valuable. I think these next 3 games may lead to some separation, because those higher pressure scenarios are more likely to occur.
​

If we get into the Butler game, and we NEED a 3, who's got the ball in their hands? IMO it is Ray. He has proven he can make 3's reliably, and he seems the least likely to be thrown off by the emotions that come with pressure. Second choice: Cline, because he is the one shooting specialist so far who has delivered big time when we truly needed it.

If the shot had to be created/coming off a quick screen I'd go Stephens then Edwards. If a play could be set up for an open look, I'd go Cline then Davis.

I like that there are so many options this year, much better than the past few years.

 

[tjreese]

Expanding on a reply to a different post...

We need shooters who can hit shots when we REALLY need them: when the score is close (or we're way behind - hasn't happened yet) or when we're struggling to create offense against a zone. Being able to make it rain 3's when we're up 20+ points against a weak team is less valuable. I think these next 3 games may lead to some separation, because those higher pressure scenarios are more likely to occur.
​

If we get into the Butler game, and we NEED a 3, who's got the ball in their hands? IMO it is Ray. He has proven he can make 3's reliably, and he seems the least likely to be thrown off by the emotions that come with pressure. Second choice: Cline, because he is the one shooting specialist so far who has delivered big time when we truly needed it.

If you need a 3 adn not a 2 and the other team knows it...Davis would be the least likely to get it off with a man in his face. If left open he could hit the shot, but I don't think he can hit it covered...that would go to Stephens, Cline and Dakota I think. No I think Davis is who I want at the line and who is good taking it to the basket...but not in a defended 3 IMO. Purdue shouldn't need a 3 against Butler. If Purdue contains the dribble and rebounds while shooting a normal percent they win

 

[boilerjrut3]

Right now I'd take Raphael in one of the corners. Seems to like that shot and it's been automatic lately.

 

[tjreese]

If the shot had to be created/coming off a quick screen I'd go Stephens then Edwards. If a play could be set up for an open look, I'd go Cline then Davis.

I like that there are so many options this year, much better than the past few years.

If Edwards had the right mismatch he would be a serious option as well...although he has a quicker release this year...it is still not as quick as Stpehens, Cline and Dakota...but a choice.

 

[PurdueGator]

The list is long and plentiful. A great problem to have. Who ever has the hot hand that night.

 

[tjreese]

Right now I'd take Raphael in one of the corners. Seems to like that shot and it's been automatic lately.

When left open with plenty of time to shoot, Davis has hit them. Hit three yesterday I think. If it is a 3 that is needed...they will cover all behind the line...no open looks in teh scenario

 

[Heller]

I,wouldn't rule out Hammons.

 

[GodFamilyCountryPurdue]

If you need a 3 adn not a 2 and the other team knows it...Davis would be the least likely to get it off with a man in his face. If left open he could hit the shot, but I don't think he can hit it covered...that would go to Stephens, Cline and Dakota I think. No I think Davis is who I want at the line and who is good taking it to the basket...but not in a defended 3 IMO. Purdue shouldn't need a 3 against Butler. If Purdue contains the dribble and rebounds while shooting a normal percent they win

Your "least likely" man did just that about a handful of times last year with time running out on the shot or game clock. Ray was and is the go to guy in situations like this.

 

[CRBoiler]

I,wouldn't rule out Hammons.

Yeah, 3 for 3 on the year, and tough to defend. Good point.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

The list is long and plentiful. A great problem to have. Who ever has the hot hand that night.

What a difference 12 months makes......

Good discussion......I don't know, but I will just throw this out to consider.....KS' late three in Happy Valley last year quite possibly saved the season.

 

[StateStreet123]

What a difference 12 months makes......

Good discussion......I don't know, but I will just throw this out to consider.....KS' late three in Happy Valley last year quite possibly saved the season.

Remember "the fumble" in 2004 that cursed our football team ever since?

I like to think of KS' late three in Happy Valley as just the opposite. "The Shot" that resurrected our bball team. Turned our fortunes around and no looking back. We were beat that game; and that crazy three created a miraculous victory and no looking back!

 

[BoilerDaddy]

Your "least likely" man did just that about a handful of times last year with time running out on the shot or game clock. Ray was and is the go to guy in situations like this.

True, but not down by three. Davis is shooting a very high percentage this year by shooting open shots, but Stephens is much more likely to get off a three pointer if he's being guarded. I would try to get Davis open in one of the corners, but if he's not open, I feel pretty good about Stephens coming off a screen.

 

[lbodel]

Yeah, 3 for 3 on the year, and tough to defend. Good point.

Although in theory, if you "need" a 3, you probably have a reason you aren't going inside...not sure that would equate to AJ shooting a 3!

But to answer, as others have pointed out, we have a few options who do better in different situations.

 

[woggy718]

What a difference 12 months makes......

Good discussion......I don't know, but I will just throw this out to consider.....KS' late three in Happy Valley last year quite possibly saved the season.

Ray has been great this year but he's also been great at finding the open spot against the zone and within the flow of the offense. If someone has to create their shot. I gotta say Stephens, VE, then Cline. I think if we are ever in the spot in a game, we load the floor with all of them, Hammonds, cline/Mathias, Stephens, Vince, and Ray and whoever can get the best look in the flow of the offense. Hell of a position for us to be in.

 

[BoilerDaddy]

Ray has been great this year but he's also been great at finding the open spot against the zone and within the flow of the offense. If someone has to create their shot. I gotta say Stephens, VE, then Cline. I think if we are ever in the spot in a game, we load the floor with all of them, Hammonds, cline/Mathias, Stephens, Vince, and Ray and whoever can get the best look in the flow of the offense. Hell of a position for us to be in.

I'd probably play Swanigan, rather than Hammons, in that situation. I trust Swanigan more on the perimeter in that situation. It's quite likely that he'll catch the inbounds pass and need to get the ball to the right teammate.

(Down by two, on the other hand, I am trying to get the ball to AJ.)

 

[tjreese]

I,wouldn't rule out Hammons.

he can hit it, but remember all are going to be covered in the described scenario...does AJ have enough time to shoot it? Nobody cares about the 2 ball in this situation...

 

[BoilerFan#35]

Kendall is our best shooter but I think Vince is clutch. Its a toss up

 

[BoilerDaddy]

Kendall is our best shooter but I think Vince is clutch. Its a toss up

I think Cline is the best shooter, but Stephens is the best at getting a shot off. I like a line-up of Stephens, Cline, Davis, Edwards, and Swanigan in that situation.

 

[tjreese]

Your "least likely" man did just that about a handful of times last year with time running out on the shot or game clock. Ray was and is the go to guy in situations like this.

I think he hit two huge threes last year that were huge but not in a game winning situation although huge plays that led to winning the game. I prefer Davis be in teh situation like the IU game where he is a driver...and may get to the line. He was not near the shooter he is today...that is why he was so open last year when he hit those last year. What I'm trying to do is distinguish a difference between hitting a 3 when open and hitting a 3 when covered. That difference can take a poorer shooter and he be the man over a better shooter that can't get a look....If it takes a 3. In the situation described the defensive scheme is altered...

Kendall is our best shooter but I think Vince is clutch. Its a toss up

Depending on lots of things, but you could probably imagine switching on all screens to keep a shooter covered...so you would want a smaller player setting the screen for the shooter that you hope has a height advantage...unless teh other team had a really slow player guarding a hammons and such. I could see a kendall or vince coming off a PJ screen with enough height to get it off against a pg defender. I could also see a higher than arc screen (maybe 4 feet pass the arc with a hammons screening if his defender was really slow and a person taking another dribble past the bigger and slower defender to shoot. In order to win the shooter must be able to get a shot off first...and then be able to make it. Now if it is a two point game and going for two is a whole another option...the whole scenario changes...and people like davis could be the person that hits a 3 ball...

 

[PU pit bull]

Great question by the OP. Obviously the shooter with the hot hand is the answer.....I think Ray mentioned how important it is to recognize the hot handed shooter and distribute to him in the last post game radio interview. Hell, if it is PJ, then it is PJ, etc. My money would be on Cline.........I remember Cliz saying that during the Pitt game Cline hit all 4 three's from different spots.....when he feels it, no one is better

 

[tjreese]

Great question by the OP. Obviously the shooter with the hot hand is the answer.....I think Ray mentioned how important it is to recognize the hot handed shooter and distribute to him in the last post game radio interview. Hell, if it is PJ, then it is PJ, etc. My money would be on Cline.........I remember Cliz saying that during the Pitt game Cline hit all 4 three's from different spots.....when he feels it, no one is better

No question you ought to feed a hot hand, but there is a difference between a hot hand in a game with good looks and everyone in the gym knowing a 3 ball is going to be shot and a two ball doesn't matter. That scenario brings about a whole new meaning. Cline could be the guy as you say though...and Kendall has been there before as well...

I kinda think about it like this. There is a high school ball player A better than B, but B gets the D1 scholly because his game will not take the hit as much as A in a game that is quicker and with more length. In high school I might want A to take the shot rather than B with all other things the same. In college, I may not think my spot shooter will be the best shooter on the move 1) off the dribble 2) off a curl because the D doesn't have to defend anything inside the arc. The triple threat options (shoot, pass, dribble ) are reduced to shooting ...behind the arc and everyone in the gym knows it must be taken there and so there are no surprises, just the ability of A) getting the shot off B) making the shot C) what if fouled...is that a tie breaker???

 

[tjreese]

I think Cline is the best shooter, but Stephens is the best at getting a shot off. I like a line-up of Stephens, Cline, Davis, Edwards, and Swanigan in that situation.

last second shot I like it, but I might swap Dakota for Caleb putting 5 perimeter players our there and if the D does the same...Vince or Kendall might have the height over teh D????

 

[ddmills333]

KS without a doubt! Height, quick release, can shoot a set shot and on the move. AND proved himself last year at Penn state

 

[PU pit bull]

You guys have definitely brought up the many facets of the three ball, whether set shot, off the move, after timeout, etc. So this question is actually harder to answer than I first thought. I appreciate all the x's and o's that have been brought up. The answer is simply to get Glenn Robinson's eligibility back.........everyone in the gym knew what he was going to do, but there wasn't a defense in the world that could stop him, x's and o's be damned LOL

 

[tjreese]

One thing with that choice...you have a chance of winning it as he will get it off and it most likely will be close...course the other team knows that too. Really tough to hit a three when everyone knows it has to be shot. This is where great athletes that elevate a lot and can stroke it make it possible, but Purdue

KS without a doubt! Height, quick release, can shoot a set shot and on the move. AND proved himself last year at Penn state

One thing with that choice...you have a chance of winning it as he will get it off and it most likely will be close...course the other team knows that too. Really tough to hit a three when everyone knows it has to be shot. This is where great athletes that elevate a lot and can stroke it make it possible, but Purdue is short on that kind of player. Best thing...play the first 95% of the game right so a last second 3 is not needed...

 

[lbodel]

Great question by the OP. Obviously the shooter with the hot hand is the answer.....I think Ray mentioned how important it is to recognize the hot handed shooter and distribute to him in the last post game radio interview. Hell, if it is PJ, then it is PJ, etc. My money would be on Cline.........I remember Cliz saying that during the Pitt game Cline hit all 4 three's from different spots.....when he feels it, no one is better

One great thing is that there is that situation, we can easily play a line-up consisting of 4 players who could take the shot (our "small" line-up without Swanigan). There isn't "one" guy they can key in on. And on top of that, you have some good passers. Look at Stephens finding Cline for a clutch 3 when he was double teamed vs. Pitt.

 

[TC4THREE]

Expanding on a reply to a different post...

We need shooters who can hit shots when we REALLY need them: when the score is close (or we're way behind - hasn't happened yet) or when we're struggling to create offense against a zone. Being able to make it rain 3's when we're up 20+ points against a weak team is less valuable. I think these next 3 games may lead to some separation, because those higher pressure scenarios are more likely to occur.
​

If we get into the Butler game, and we NEED a 3, who's got the ball in their hands? IMO it is Ray. He has proven he can make 3's reliably, and he seems the least likely to be thrown off by the emotions that come with pressure. Second choice: Cline, because he is the one shooting specialist so far who has delivered big time when we truly needed it.

Depends on how the defense sets up. We have 7 guys that can knock down an open 3. I'd probably give the ball to Davis and let him run a pick and roll with Swanigan. Have Stephens Cline and Mathias spacing the floor and let Davis come off that screen and make the decision on whether to shoot, pass it off to Swanigan if both defenders chase Davis, or dish it to one of the shooters if someone helps. My guess is the defense will double the ball and leave Swanigan open. I really don't care who of those 5 (or Thompson or Edwards) take it so long as they get a good look.

 

[BoilerFan#35]

KS without a doubt! Height, quick release, can shoot a set shot and on the move. AND proved himself last year at Penn state

I agree why not the guy made the shot to save last years season. Might not of got a tourney berth with a loss to Penn State

 

[tjreese]

Depends on how the defense sets up. We have 7 guys that can knock down an open 3. I'd probably give the ball to Davis and let him run a pick and roll with Swanigan. Have Stephens Cline and Mathias spacing the floor and let Davis come off that screen and make the decision on whether to shoot, pass it off to Swanigan if both defenders chase Davis, or dish it to one of the shooters if someone helps. My guess is the defense will double the ball and leave Swanigan open. I really don't care who of those 5 (or Thompson or Edwards) take it so long as they get a good look.

perhaps I was reading too much into it? I was reading that it needed a 3 NOW...this possession like a last second shot or at least in the final seconds. In that scenario nobody may be chasing anyone since a 2 may not matter. Now if I misunderstood the scenario and a 2 was okay since there was more time everything changes. The D will jump all off ball screens with no fear of the offensive player diving to the bucket and so I would only expect a ball screen or NO screen with an athlete or substantial height advantage like a Kendall shooting over a PJ?

If it is a couple possession game and a 2 helps then there is much ammo, but if Purdue is down 3 with 12 seconds that is different. If Purdue is down 3 with 30 seconds..a quick 2 may be okay? I've added my comments with the understanding that Purdue really needed a 3 NOW and I may have misread things?

 

[BoilerNGold013]

hammons b/c no one will see it coming. Put hammons in a high pick-and-roll with Cline but AJ will be the guard and Cline the screener. Unstoppable. Same level as Nash-Stodemire unstoppable. The only reason we have not see this yet is b/c Matt is saving it deep in the play book for an NCAA tourney game.

 

[Swoosh13]

You'd have to be crazy to pick Davis on a designed 3 play. He's been making his open looks from the corner but he's not the type to pull one off the dribble or off of a screen. Stephens is still the pick.

 

[CRBoiler]

perhaps I was reading too much into it? I was reading that it needed a 3 NOW...this possession like a last second shot or at least in the final seconds. In that scenario nobody may be chasing anyone since a 2 may not matter. Now if I misunderstood the scenario and a 2 was okay since there was more time everything changes. The D will jump all off ball screens with no fear of the offensive player diving to the bucket and so I would only expect a ball screen or NO screen with an athlete or substantial height advantage like a Kendall shooting over a PJ?

If it is a couple possession game and a 2 helps then there is much ammo, but if Purdue is down 3 with 12 seconds that is different. If Purdue is down 3 with 30 seconds..a quick 2 may be okay? I've added my comments with the understanding that Purdue really needed a 3 NOW and I may have misread things?

I mentioned a couple scenarios and then left it open to interpretation. The "down by 3 with 2 seconds left" scenario is different than the "down by 15 because we are struggling against a quality zone and can't feed our posts with 8 minutes left " scenario. However, in both situations I think we need 3-point shooting. There is more immediate urgency with the first scenario, but the second scenario carries plenty of pressure to hit 3's to improve spacing as well.

Thanks for all the responses. I agree with everyone who said it is great to have so many options. I remember a time when we would have said to get it to DJ Byrd & pray, because there was essentially no other shooter close to the appropriate caliber needed.

 

[TC4THREE]

You'd have to be crazy to pick Davis on a designed 3 play. He's been making his open looks from the corner but he's not the type to pull one off the dribble or off of a screen. Stephens is still the pick.

We can put four shooters out with him and I trust him most to find us a good shot. I actually think he isn't very likely to end up taking the shot on the play I described because he probably gets doubled coming off the ball screen. Most likely the screener is going to be open and even more likely if it is Swanigan because teams tend to forget about big men when trying to take a 3. If I can get a wide open 3 for Swanigan in a situation where we need one and the other team knows it I will take that because you know they aren't leaving the other guys open.

 

[TC4THREE]

My scenario assumes we have at least 8 or so seconds. With two seconds you can't really run anything anyway. You throw it to whoever can get open. In that scenario I'd probably have Swanigan inbound the ball and run Kendall off a triple screen with the screeners rolling to different areas around the arc. Kendall is primary option due to his length and the fact that he is much more used to catch and shoot. That said with that scenario you just throw it to whoever can get open and hope for the best.

 

[TC4THREE]

You'd have to be crazy to pick Davis on a designed 3 play. He's been making his open looks from the corner but he's not the type to pull one off the dribble or off of a screen. Stephens is still the pick.

Also probably the least likely guy to be left open. If you can get him the ball great but I'd be prepared for Plan B.

 

[TC4THREE]

perhaps I was reading too much into it? I was reading that it needed a 3 NOW...this possession like a last second shot or at least in the final seconds. In that scenario nobody may be chasing anyone since a 2 may not matter. Now if I misunderstood the scenario and a 2 was okay since there was more time everything changes. The D will jump all off ball screens with no fear of the offensive player diving to the bucket and so I would only expect a ball screen or NO screen with an athlete or substantial height advantage like a Kendall shooting over a PJ?

If it is a couple possession game and a 2 helps then there is much ammo, but if Purdue is down 3 with 12 seconds that is different. If Purdue is down 3 with 30 seconds..a quick 2 may be okay? I've added my comments with the understanding that Purdue really needed a 3 NOW and I may have misread things?

Davis would come off the ball screen not looking to drive but shoot if left open. The defense knows we need a three and my bet is they send help leaving someone open. I trust Ray to read the defense and do the right thing.

 

[tjreese]

Davis would come off the ball screen not looking to drive but shoot if left open. The defense knows we need a three and my bet is they send help leaving someone open. I trust Ray to read the defense and do the right thing.

i can't imagine anyone being open "IF" a three is needed now. Rule 1...don't foul a jump shooter been there since the earth was formed. I assume the opposing coach does not want his players going through any screens... on ball or off placing another at the line in the bonus or double bonus situation instead of taking a chance on a miss of the 3 and definitely don't want to foul someone shooting a 3. I expect all coaches to NOT double and leave anyone open since a 3 makes the difference. I expect all switches so someone does not get lost on a screen, but that all players will be defended.

Since the team does not want anyone to get a good look and get caught on a screen...the off ball screen probably cannot receive a pass as a defender is solidly in the passing lane with no worries of a two ball. The safest bet with all things equal is to score off the dribble although things could happen that could allow an off ball screen to be effective with a 3 ball and having no fears the team would go for two points...I just think it probably doesn't go that way.

so "the shot" has to be behind the arc and will be taken with a guy having a hand up. There will be no open look, there will be no lunging at the ball...the defender will not move to allow the shooter to lunge into him as he is shooting hopeful the refs bail him out. The guy has to rise and hit it with a hand in his face. Under the right scenario all things are possible, but I question if another coach said to double and leave anyone open and since I see them switching to keep the ball in front of them I'm led to believe it is a contested shot totally different than what may happen through most of the game...but I also know that the best laid plans sometimes go astray when the game starts...

 

[tjreese]

I mentioned a couple scenarios and then left it open to interpretation. The "down by 3 with 2 seconds left" scenario is different than the "down by 15 because we are struggling against a quality zone and can't feed our posts with 8 minutes left " scenario. However, in both situations I think we need 3-point shooting. There is more immediate urgency with the first scenario, but the second scenario carries plenty of pressure to hit 3's to improve spacing as well.

Thanks for all the responses. I agree with everyone who said it is great to have so many options. I remember a time when we would have said to get it to DJ Byrd & pray, because there was essentially no other shooter close to the appropriate caliber needed.

yes...a read into one scenario instead of the other can lead to different answers.

 

[tjreese]

One great thing is that there is that situation, we can easily play a line-up consisting of 4 players who could take the shot (our "small" line-up without Swanigan). There isn't "one" guy they can key in on. And on top of that, you have some good passers. Look at Stephens finding Cline for a clutch 3 when he was double teamed vs. Pitt.

Why stop at four...a big player is not needed if a 2 or a rebound doesn't matter. Why not Dakota, Cline,Stephens, PJ and Edwards...or possibly Davis as a decoy instead of PJ since PJ may not be able to get the shot off? Let the other team use bigs out in space or place 5 smaller, quicker players out there as well...hopefully 5 that some do not see much time???? My interpretation of the scenario which could be totally wrong is one that passing will no be a method of attack due to the time and knowing the team will jump all off ball screens not being worried about anything inside the arc. A different read of the scenario produces different answers...