AH1971

Sisley transferring to prep school?

Not sure Sisley has ever been a "lock". I certainly never though he was at least. Purdue has one available scholarship and has been recruiting him the hardest for quite some time. Fland/McNeeley/Queen were all national recruits coveted by everybody. Most of our core targets are local products where IU has had a much better success rate regardless of who is coaching. IU made Mullins a priority well before he was even offered from the major suitors. I like where IU is with Tiller, Mullins, and Haralson and Moreno now more that Calipari is gone. Whiff on all four of those guys, yeah we're going to have a problem. Don't see it though.

Based on the recent officials Haralson has lined up, I think there’s a better chance we land him than Sisley. And still might get both. -Haralson -Mullins -Sisley/Koehler -Tiller/Moreno would be one hell of a class

Probably controversial, but I think Koehler has way more upside than Sisley. Koehler has grown 5-6 inches since his freshman year and is a lot more athletic than Sisley. He’s also way under the radar in the sense that last season was really the first year he’s gotten extended run at the varsity level considering he’s been behind Booker and Davis, now both B10 players, whereas Sisley has been a day 1 starter since his freshman year. Koehler’s jump to the EYBL circuit has certainly been big for his exposure as will playing on a Cathedral team who should be one of the better teams in the state once again.

I'm not saying he's going to be the next Bam, but Bam wasn't Bam when he showed up at UK either. He filled out immensely between his first year at UK and in his few seasons in the NBA, was drafted solely due to his measurables, and then developed the rest of his game once he became a professional player. I don't think Flory is as athletic as Hanner, don't think he needs to be either. But Hanner was never going to be a small ball 5 either, he didn't have the frame to support a substantial increase in body mass without sacrificing some of his athleticism. Hanner was a project that needed to develop some ball skills and game out to the perimeter in order to make it to the next level. Flory isn't that type of prospect.

Hey, at least we don't have to talk about Fletcher Loyer anymore

Guessing when there is new news on Catchings it will be relayed. Nothing new on the current front other than visiting BYU, Florida St, and Tennessee.

He has very broad shoulders and a frame that could easily support playing at 240+ lbs. He’s a lot stronger and a lot more coordinated than Hanner at his current age. His ceiling is Bam Adebayo who possessed very little basketball skills prior to entering the NBA draft.

You’re making my point. You don’t need to leave him open if you aren’t selling out to stop Edey. There was one team in college basketball capable of playing Edey straight up last year and Loyer had one of the most laughable games because of it. He was a literal non-factor in the national title game because UConn simply ran him off the 3point line because they didn’t double Edey.

What are you talking about? They were a 1 seed who literally returned their entire team including the reigning NPOY. They were a preseason top 5 team. Who didn’t think Purdue was going to be good coming into this season?

But what else does Loyer bring to the floor if you’re running him off the 3 point line? He was borderline unplayable in many games for long stretches last year if he wasn’t shooting at a high clip. He can’t handle the ball, he doesn’t break down opposing defenders, and again he is AWFUL defensively. If Gicarri Harris proves to be a serviceable offensive player next year, he’ll eat into Loyer’s minutes.

Correct, but he’s still susceptible to falling off (see 2019-2020 season) and needing a few years to build his roster to really threaten in the tournament (see 2021, 2022, and 2023). He doesn’t recruit well enough to reload overnight. I don’t expect Purdue to “fall off a cliff” this season. But I don’t think it’s more likely they finish mid-pack in the B10 this vs competing for a B10 title.

I think Woodson has locked into 5 core recruits: Haralson, Mullins, Sisley, Moreno, and Tiller. I think he’d take all 5 if all wanted to come but would be content with up to 3.

Respect the hell out of what Purdue/Painter have done, simply correcting you that they are susceptible to falling off after losing a core group/superstar. - They missed the tournament two straight years plus lost in the first round the in the next two tournaments in the 4 years immediately following the last Baby Boiler -after the core of Mathias/Edwards/Haas/Swanigan/Edwards all moved on the went 16-15 after their E8 run and then to lost a 13,15,16 in consecutive tournaments. Purdue will be fine under Painter, but history shows they don’t reload overnight

No reason to not have both. I’ve seen 3 as well but understand the climate in college basketball is vastly different today than it was 40 years ago.

He shot well with his feet set and under him with nobody guarding him. You could attribute 80-90% of that due to the attention Edey drew. It’s very clear that in games where teams elected not to double Edey and ran him off the 3 point he struggled immensely. I don’t see anyone on next years Purdue team who comes close to drawing anywhere near the attention that Edey did. And don’t get me started on the defensive end. If he’s a net positive on both ends of the floor next year I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

Put any of those guys on a team with Zach Edey and you can change that sentence around 9 different ways. The won in spite of Fletcher Loyer.

Immediately after Carsen they went 16-15 and fortunate for them, had the tournament cancelled because of COVID. They won two tournament games over the next 3 seasons after that before finally playing in the title game with a once in a lifetime giant last season. They're built to win games in the B10 as Painter has mastered the art of finding high floor/low ceiling guys who buy in. But they're typically not a threat to do much in the postseason as evident by Painter's tournament track record the last two decades.

Malik has the chance to be an elite (and efficient) scorer around the basket as the 5 in a small ball lineup, as does Ballo. Teams aren’t going to double and triple team Malik (or Ballo) with guys like Mgbako, Goode, Rice, Carlyle, etc out on the perimeter. That’s the upside to not having to rely on Cupps, Galloway, Gunn, etc as your primary backcourt for long stretches.

I think this all but reinforces that Woodson plans to stagger Ballo and Reneau’s minutes. I fully expect Ballo and Reneau to start at the 4 and 5 but don’t see any way they play 30 minutes simultaneously. Too much versatility elsewhere. I’ve always considered Hatton as an emergency signing and don’t see him playing extended minutes unless someone gets hurt. I see Ballo/Reneau occupying the 5 spot for ~35 mpg.

The roster construction totally falls on Woodson, have never steered from that. But you still have to play your best guys. I don't see any three guard lineup from any of the last few years that would have warranted taking Race Thompson or Malik Reneau out of the lineup.

He’s never had a collection of 3 guards worth playing together over the alternative in any of the 3 seasons he’s been here. Thought that was obvious?

Yes and those double and triple teams came because you had guys like Galloway, Cupps, Gunn, etc sitting out on the perimeter who weren't a threat to shoot...like at all. If IU beat you by making 10+ 3 pointers you simply tipped your cap.

He doesn’t need a personal defender. Just silly to suggest that Mike Woodson needed to run more sets to free up poor shooters such as Galloway and Cupps. I’d maybe see your point if Galloway shot a lot better than 26% from 3 last year, but more shots for Cupps and Galloway and less for Reneau and Ware would have lead to an even worse season.

Mgbako attempted 5 three pointers a game during the B10 season. Half of his shots were from the perimeter. That's the very definition of volume. It's guys like Cupps and Galloway who started 75% of the conference season who were low volume. They weren't low volume because we didn't run action for them, they were low volume because they either a) couldn't shoot (Galloway) or b) afraid to shoot (Cupps). There's your proof.