ADVERTISEMENT

Thoughts on Penn State Basketball and tonight's loss to Purdue

Ranger Dan

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 31, 2003
19,928
10,651
1
York PA
There are no moral victories... period. Losing isn't fun for fans, players, or coaches. Losing a close game at home against the top team in the Big Ten, when you clearly out played them at times is frustrating. The fact that there is disappointment/frustration after the close loss, means that there is hope, dare I say anticipation, of Penn State winning this game is evidence of the potential for this team.

There are 4 players on this team that will be all big ten in one form or another.
  • Carr is going to be first team all big ten point guard at some point, the only thing holding him back is the overall success of the team. He should be on the all big ten freshman team, and in the conversation for freshman AA. The way he took over the offense at the end of regulation was amazing. Purdue had no answer for him defensively.
  • Stevens may not have quite the high ceiling that Carr does, but he will be 2nd or 3rd team at least. He is starting to get confidence with taking bigger guys off the dribble and he has the ability to do this against just about anyone. Did you see the poster dunk he had on Swanigan?
  • Reaves is .all defensive team this year, and as the announcer said multiple times, is a candidate for defensive player of the year. Reaves is one of my all time favorite players to watch. His energy, quickness, hands, and ability to get off the floor are unique in my time watching Penn State basketball. If he could shoot better from the outside, he would be a superstar.
  • Watkins will certainly be all big ten defense in the future, and should be discussed for all freshmen big ten based upon his defense. I don't know how those big man clinics work... whether you have to be invited, or must you pay your own way, but if he ever gets his offensive skills polished he may be all around all big ten someday. Mike is now starting to figure out the rebounding thing and we will see him become a dominant defensive and offensive rebounder.

This team has suffered through some tough losses this year, but they were energetic and motivated. There is no more important job for a coach than to motivate his team and have them prepared to play. The team also had a great game plan to apply defensive pressure and rebound the ball. This game plan and the subsequent execution of the plan worked extremely well and neutralized the likely big ten POY for the first half.

The outside shooting on this team has been hot and cold at times this year, and unfortunately, the outside shooting was extremely cold today. I don't know what you can do within a game to correct this except shoot yourself out of the cold spell or bring someone in off the bench. Unfortunately, there really are only 2 consistant outside threats this year, although Carr and Stevens both have hit some clutch 3 pt. shots at times.

Penn State had three straight dunks to start the second half, before Purdue scored a single point. I can't count the number of games in the Dechelis, Dunn, and Parkhill eras where there wasn't a single dunk in a game. Think about how much more athletic this team is than at any other time in the last 25 years (maybe ever). Even players like Moore (who is a step down in athletic ability from the rest of the contributors), had an emphatic put back dunk in the first half when Penn State owned the boards.
 
I would really like PSU to have a "threat" from the outside. We have seen Carr, Garner, and Banks be capable but not necessary a threat.

Purdue has four guys on their team this year shooting better from behind the arc percentage wise than the three I mentioned.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranger Dan
I would really like PSU to have a "threat" from the outside. We have seen Carr, Garner, and Banks be capable but not necessary a threat.

Purdue has four guys on their team this year shooting better from behind the arc percentage wise than the three I mentioned.

You're being kind with 4. It's actually 5 in their rotation. Tough comparison though, as not many (probably not any other) teams will have 5 guys making at least one 3 a game while shooting >40%.

And WTF happened to Spike Albrecht? (injuries and confidence I guess, but he's gone from a sharpshooter to a non-factor at the offensive end)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ranger Dan
I would really like PSU to have a "threat" from the outside. We have seen Carr, Garner, and Banks be capable but not necessary a threat.

Purdue has four guys on their team this year shooting better from behind the arc percentage wise than the three I mentioned.

For all of Penn State's athleticism, it was an unathletic sharpshooter for purdon't who beat them in overtime (with two 3's). You would think Chambers could recruit someone like that. He desperately needs a consistent deep threat (at least one).
 
We're a 3 man team in a lot of instances. Carr, Stevens and Watkins are all highly talented freshmen. We can go somewhere with those guys here.

I've been disappointed by the upperclassmen more so than anything else on this team.
 
Do we have a shot at getting him?

I'm leaning toward no, simply because he's had Kentucky and Arizona watch him, not sure if an offer is coming, but seems like he may have a chance at an elite school. More power to him if he can get that offer.
 
They have too many unforced turnovers and are making too many poor passes.

Purdue had more TOs than PSU did last night

PSU also had more offensive rebounds (14-10), total rebounds (40-38), steals (12-7) and blocks (10-2). Only place they basically didn't beat them in was points. For one simple reason.

PSU from 3 -- 2-18
Purdue from 3 -- 12-26

30 points right there of a difference. There's nothing else to complain about other than that stat. Well that and Garner's genius play to not realize the ball didn't touch the rim and fouled the guy with 2 seconds left on the shot clock. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: Woodpecker
We're a 3 man team in a lot of instances. Carr, Stevens and Watkins are all highly talented freshmen. We can go somewhere with those guys here.

I've been disappointed by the upperclassmen more so than anything else on this team.

So has everyone else unfortunately
 
Well that and Garner's genius play to not realize the ball didn't touch the rim and fouled the guy with 2 seconds left on the shot clock.

I feel bad for Shep in this instance, even if I've been critical of his offense a lot this year. Given that scramble situation, I sure thought we needed to foul given the way the Purdue player corralled that ball too. He sold that the ball hit the rim and Shep likely knew one of two things, either (1) that ball hit the rim and I need to foul, or (2) that he needs to get a shot up asap. Purdue player held onto the ball and made no progress toward shooting, Shep assumed the ball hit the rim.

That Purdue player either thought the ball hit the rim and waited for the foul, or made a brilliant decision to sell that Shep needed to foul him.
 
For all of Penn State's athleticism, it was an unathletic sharpshooter for purdon't who beat them in overtime (with two 3's). You would think Chambers could recruit someone like that. He desperately needs a consistent deep threat (at least one).

Chambers doesn't typically recruit the un-athletic - one trick pony - 3 pt specialist types. If he is following the Jay Wright model, he wants guards that can play the 1, 2, and 3, and forwards that can play 3, 4, and maybe stretch 4. This philosophy doesn't rely on a traditional center that much either. In Penn State's case, we have Watkins who is a 4 or a legitimate 5, but can't play the 3. Maybe this means that there is room for a 3 pt specialist. The one guy on the roster that is an unknown is Grant Hazle. He is a 6' 5" freshman guard with 1 FG in 2 minutes, in 3 games. I don't recall whether or not he was a big time shooter coming out of high school or not, so maybe he isn't the answer. It seems that the limiting factor for minutes is the players ability to contribute defensively. So, maybe he is the shooter that we need that just hasn't been on the floor enough.
 
I would really like PSU to have a "threat" from the outside. We have seen Carr, Garner, and Banks be capable but not necessary a threat.

Purdue has four guys on their team this year shooting better from behind the arc percentage wise than the three I mentioned.
The lack of an outside shooter is really what is killing PSU right now. College basketball is so reliant on the 3 that it's a killer not to have one or two snipers.
 
The lack of an outside shooter is really what is killing PSU right now. College basketball is so reliant on the 3 that it's a killer not to have one or two snipers.

It's not just college basketball, it's basketball in general. Floor spacing in the half court is so necessary to a functioning offense and poor shooting from the perimeter has plagued Chambers' teams throughout his tenure.
 
It's not just college basketball, it's basketball in general. Floor spacing in the half court is so necessary to a functioning offense and poor shooting from the perimeter has plagued Chambers' teams throughout his tenure.
If that's true in the NBA, it's fading out fast. On just about every NBA team now, your small forward can hit above 35% on threes.
 
My thoughts? Were the two offensive fouls called on Carr and Stevens really offensive fouls. I want to see a slow motion, or still shot of the Purdue players positioning on Stevens because it sure seemed like he was moving lateral into Stevens at impact. Carr's defender flopped when he was "bumped" into. My biggest gripe is that had this been AT Purdue, with the opposite situation, defensive fouls would have almost certainly been called. Can't say I'm upset about any other fouls/non-fouls, but those two were important plays.
 
Chambers doesn't typically recruit the un-athletic - one trick pony - 3 pt specialist types. If he is following the Jay Wright model, he wants guards that can play the 1, 2, and 3, and forwards that can play 3, 4, and maybe stretch 4. This philosophy doesn't rely on a traditional center that much either. In Penn State's case, we have Watkins who is a 4 or a legitimate 5, but can't play the 3. Maybe this means that there is room for a 3 pt specialist. The one guy on the roster that is an unknown is Grant Hazle. He is a 6' 5" freshman guard with 1 FG in 2 minutes, in 3 games. I don't recall whether or not he was a big time shooter coming out of high school or not, so maybe he isn't the answer. It seems that the limiting factor for minutes is the players ability to contribute defensively. So, maybe he is the shooter that we need that just hasn't been on the floor enough.



So you think Pat is following the Jay Wright model possibly? Has Pat stated he wants to build a program just like Wright has? Or are you just throwing that out there as Ranger Dan food for thought?
 
My thoughts? Were the two offensive fouls called on Carr and Stevens really offensive fouls. I want to see a slow motion, or still shot of the Purdue players positioning on Stevens because it sure seemed like he was moving lateral into Stevens at impact. Carr's defender flopped when he was "bumped" into. My biggest gripe is that had this been AT Purdue, with the opposite situation, defensive fouls would have almost certainly been called. Can't say I'm upset about any other fouls/non-fouls, but those two were important plays.


Close games come down to way more than two calls over the course of a game. In a close game you can question a call right before the first media time out in the first half. If the kid doesn't hit two threes no one remembers the close judgement calls that could have gone either way. We were worse than a high school team from 3pt line. Not gonna win many games shooting like that. Look at the 3s not the refs.
 
It's not just college basketball, it's basketball in general. Floor spacing in the half court is so necessary to a functioning offense and poor shooting from the perimeter has plagued Chambers' teams throughout his tenure.
I hate our offense. Too much iso, not enough ball movement and set plays. I would say that Chambers is just playing to his players' strengths but we have seen this throughout his tenure here.
 
In a close game you can question a call right before the first media time out in the first half.

Not at all. In a close game what happens at the end of game is far more relevant than what happens at the beginning.
 
My thoughts? Were the two offensive fouls called on Carr and Stevens really offensive fouls. I want to see a slow motion, or still shot of the Purdue players positioning on Stevens because it sure seemed like he was moving lateral into Stevens at impact. Carr's defender flopped when he was "bumped" into. My biggest gripe is that had this been AT Purdue, with the opposite situation, defensive fouls would have almost certainly been called. Can't say I'm upset about any other fouls/non-fouls, but those two were important plays.

Was the over-and-back call against Purdue late really a violation? The replay seemed to show the Penn State guard knock the ball away from PJ Thompson twice before Thompson recovered it in the backcourt which shouldn't be a violation.
 
Was the over-and-back call against Purdue late really a violation?

I wondered about that too. The difference in my example is that there would have been foul shots for PSU, instead of turning the ball over along with fouls called against the offensive player in both instances.
 
So you think Pat is following the Jay Wright model possibly? Has Pat stated he wants to build a program just like Wright has? Or are you just throwing that out there as Ranger Dan food for thought?
Chambers, IIRC, has repeatedly said since he was hired that Villanova and Jay Wright's program and offensive scheme is the model he's trying to build at Penn State. The offensive schemes are very similar, particularly this season.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nit16
My thoughts? Were the two offensive fouls called on Carr and Stevens really offensive fouls. I want to see a slow motion, or still shot of the Purdue players positioning on Stevens because it sure seemed like he was moving lateral into Stevens at impact. Carr's defender flopped when he was "bumped" into. My biggest gripe is that had this been AT Purdue, with the opposite situation, defensive fouls would have almost certainly been called. Can't say I'm upset about any other fouls/non-fouls, but those two were important plays.

Thought they were both good calls. The Stevens one was an obvious charge, as he lowered the shoulder and put it right into Swanigan's chest as he went thru him. That should be a charge regardless of where the game is played. The Carr one could have been a play-on, thought that it probably was a charge but the defender definitely embellished it a bit, which sometimes will cause the ref to swallow his whistle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NovaPSULuvr
I hate our offense. Too much iso, not enough ball movement and set plays. I would say that Chambers is just playing to his players' strengths but we have seen this throughout his tenure here.

I felt like that for a while too, but was sold on the fact that a lot of the kids want to play in this type of system, and it's what draws them to Chambers. Most of the better high school kids want the freedom to go out and play, not run a choreographed set every other time down the floor. If he's running more scripted stuff, he might be doing it without guys like Carr and Stevens.
 
  • Like
Reactions: getmyjive11
Thought they were both good calls.

Fair enough, but I asked if Swanigan was set which means it wouldn't matter if Stevens hit him. The Carr play stinks of PSU's reputation of not being one of the big boys that will get the benefit of the doubt (meaning ref swallow his whistle).
 
I would really like PSU to have a "threat" from the outside. We have seen Carr, Garner, and Banks be capable but not necessary a threat.

Purdue has four guys on their team this year shooting better from behind the arc percentage wise than the three I mentioned.
I agree. In basketball, the object of the game is to put the ball in the basket. All great teams have shooters and more than one. Over the years, I've seen PSU players put up far too many bricks. We have some decent inside players now, but still need a couple guys who can knock down a 3 with regularity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nitlion93
Fair enough, but I asked if Swanigan was set which means it wouldn't matter if Stevens hit him. The Carr play stinks of PSU's reputation of not being one of the big boys that will get the benefit of the doubt (meaning ref swallow his whistle).

Swanigan doesn't need to be "set". He can be moving laterally and still draw the charge (and when Stevens dips his shoulder like that, it should be a charge).
 
Hate to criticize a kid but, the Zemgulus kid has been terrible. He was recruited because he could shoot ?? He is terribly slow and does not fit in with this mini-Nova team (if only they, someone, could shoot the three). Garner has lost his patience and jacks up 3s when NOT open.

Actually, I am very happy the Painter kid did not come to PSU, he looks like a bigger version of Zemgulus (spelling?).
Everyone wants an athletic player that can shoot. Villanova has a team of them.
I really think we will be VERY good next year. Nothing like a year of practice and strength training.
 
I felt like that for a while too, but was sold on the fact that a lot of the kids want to play in this type of system, and it's what draws them to Chambers. Most of the better high school kids want the freedom to go out and play, not run a choreographed set every other time down the floor. If he's running more scripted stuff, he might be doing it without guys like Carr and Stevens.
It's definitely a fine line you have to walk.
 
I agree. In basketball, the object of the game is to put the ball in the basket. All great teams have shooters and more than one. Over the years, I've seen PSU players put up far too many bricks. We have some decent inside players now, but still need a couple guys who can knock down a 3 with regularity.
Agree and that's the frustrating part. In the past, PSU would get some pretty good three point shooters but were rarely ever able to match them with athletic or inside players. They could pull off some upsets if the outside shooters were hot, but on average, they would lose more games due to the lack of consistency (live by the three, die by the three). Now that we are getting more athletic players who can defend, dunk, block shots, get steals, and rebound (when in position), we seem to be missing the sharpshooters. I know it's hard to find players who do it all, but getting a couple sharp shooters (ala the Crispins, Mike Walker, or Talor Battle) to go along with this core team could pay dividends.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Howie'81 and OzLion
It's definitely a fine line you have to walk.

The thing that kills me most about our offense is the number of possessions where only one guy touches the ball and shoots it. That's fine in transition if we're getting to the rim, but too often we end up with the ball handler either jacking up a quick 3 or a quick, contested 15-foot jumper. I know we want to speed up the game, but better recognition of when to do it will lead to better looks (and better offensive rebounding opportunities).
 
  • Like
Reactions: getmyjive11
I know it's hard to find players who do it all, but getting a couple sharp shooters (ala the Crispins, Mike Walker, or Talor Battle) to go along with this core team could pay dividends.

Quick trivia question that would probably shock most...Out of Battle, Garner, and Banks, who has the lowest career 3-point %?
 
Fair enough, but I asked if Swanigan was set which means it wouldn't matter if Stevens hit him. The Carr play stinks of PSU's reputation of not being one of the big boys that will get the benefit of the doubt (meaning ref swallow his whistle).

I think people often misapply the charge rule, and this is an example. The defender doesn't have to be set for Stevens to be called for a charge. He rushed in with his shoulder down. It's almost always a charge.
 
Quick trivia question that would probably shock most...Out of Battle, Garner, and Banks, who has the lowest career 3-point %?

It's probably Battle given that you said this would shock most. I'd imagine Shep's career 3PT% is around 35-36, Banks maybe 34 or 35.
 
Actually, I am very happy the Painter kid did not come to PSU, he looks like a bigger version of Zemgulus (spelling?).

He certainly is at least a season away from being a useful piece. He's quite slow and despite being a workman, just not a very useful player at this stage.
 
I think people often misapply the charge rule, and this is an example. The defender doesn't have to be set for Stevens to be called for a charge. He rushed in with his shoulder down. It's almost always a charge.

Ok, I understand Stevens was driving - but I want to see the evidence that defender deserved the charging call (does anyone have video at 1:15 to go in OT)?

From NCAA rules committee before season:

In regard to the block/charge call in men’s basketball, the committee is proposing that a defensive player is not permitted to move into the path of an offensive player once he has started his upward motion with the ball to attempt a field goal or pass. If the defensive player is not in legal guarding position by this time, it is a blocking foul.

The current rule calls for a defender to be in legal guarding position before the offensive player lifts off the floor.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT