I wanted to have confidence in the win vs the Zags so I made the Purdue preview early pre-zags game
Starters
- Braden Smith (G)
- Height/Class: 6‑0, Junior
- Key Stats: 16.2 ppg, 8.6 apg, 38.6 3pt%, 36.8 mpg
- C.J. Cox (G)
- Height/Class: 6‑3, Freshman
- Key Stats: 5.8 ppg, 2.9 rpg, 38.5 3pt%, 18.6 mpg
- Fletcher Loyer (G)
- Height/Class: 6‑4, Junior
- Key Stats: 13.6 ppg, 2.1 rpg, 46.1 3pt%, 30.8 mpg
- Trey Kaufman‐Renn (F)
- Height/Class: 6‑9 230lbs, Junior
- Key Stats: 20.2 ppg, 6.3 rpg, 42.9 3pt% (only 3 made), 30.4 mpg
- Caleb Furst (F)
- Height/Class: 6‑10 235lbs, Senior
- Key Stats: 4.3 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 0.0 3pt%, 18.7 mpg
Bench
- Camden Heide (F)
- Height/Class: 6‑7, Sophomore
- Key Stats: 4.5 ppg, 3.6 rpg, 37.5 3pt%, 19.7 mpg
- Myles Colvin (G)
- Height/Class: 6‑5, Sophomore
- Key Stats: 5.3 ppg, 2.5 rpg, 31.7 3pt%, 17.4 mpg
- Gicarri Harris (G)
- Height/Class: 6‑3, Freshman
- Key Stats: 3.9 ppg, 1.8 rpg, 30.4 3pt%, 15.2 mpg
Purdue Team Breakdown
Potential Strengths
- High Overall Shooting Efficiency
- Purdue’s .489 FG% ranks among the top 15 nationally .
- They also shoot 38.3% from three, good for a top‐15 rank (#11), but lower volume (#232).
- Strong Ball Movement & Low Turnovers
- Purdue averages 15.8 assists per game (#39) while only committing around 10.3 turnovers (#44).
- Reliable Perimeter Threats
- Multiple rotation players shoot 35%+ from deep (Loyer at 46.1%, Cox at 38.5%, Smith at 38.6%, Heide at 37.5%).
- Inside‐Out Balance
- Kaufman‐Renn’s scoring punch in the paint (20 ppg) forces defenses to collapse, opening three‐point looks for Loyer (46.1 %), Smith, and others.
- Braden Smith adds a dynamic playmaking element (8.6 apg) so Purdue can run offense through the post or via pick‐and‐roll.
Potential Weaknesses
-
Secondary Scoring Beyond the Big 3
– Purdue relies heavily on Kaufman‐Renn and Smith to generate points. If either is off the floor or having a tough night, consistent backup options aren’t always guaranteed. -
Limited Shot‐Blocking
- Averaging 1.6 blocks per game (ranked #361- almost last nationally) means Purdue does not offer much rim protection.
- Rebounding Is Merely Average
- 9.8 offensive boards per game (rank #244) suggests they do not dominate second‐chance opportunities.
- Opponents grab 28.6% ORB% per game (#231), so Purdue at times struggles to secure defensive rebounds.
- Free‐Throw Percentage Not Great
- At 72.7% (#152), it is respectable. Loyer and Smith are automatic, everyone else is a sub-par FT shooter .
Matchup vs. Houston
Game Context and Venue
- This game will take place in Indianapolis, essentially making it a home game for Purdue, which is only about an hour away.
- However, we’ve been undefeated on the road this year, so playing in front of a pro-Purdue crowd may not be as big a factor as one might think.
Purdue’s Physical Profile
- Overall, Purdue is not a particularly big or physical team. Even their starting five lacks size.
- For much of the game, they often go even smaller, rotating center Caleb Furst out for wings like Colvin or Heide to create spacing around Trey Kaufman-Renn.
Rebounding
- We should be able to dominate the boards, especially on the offensive glass.
- If Purdue sticks to its smaller lineup for spacing, the rebounding margin could become quite lopsided in our favor.
Their Defense vs. Our Offense
-
One key matchup is 6’4” Milos Uzan vs. 5’11” Braden Smith. It’s hard to see Smith effectively guarding Milos given the size and athleticism difference.
-
Purdue has neither a true shot-blocker nor the physicality to push J’Wan out of the post. J’Wan can likely score at will if given iso. but aware of their size disadvantage, Purdue crowds the paint to provide help defense. This could open up plenty of inside-out opportunities. With three 40%+ shooters on the perimeter, we can capitalize if they collapse on J’Wan.
-
None of their starting guards are elite individual defenders, though Colvin off the bench is a great perimeter defender. Purdue compensates for weaker defenders by crowding and helping aggressively, which should leave open looks if we move the ball well.
-
Second-chance points could also be significant, especially if we dominate the offensive boards.
-
We can get away with Terrance at the 4 in this matchup, especially with Purdue’s smaller lineups (to create spacing for jwan)
Their Offense vs. Our Defense
-
We are ranked #1 nationally in post defense and excel at trapping. This should help us neutralize Trey Kaufman-Renn. Also in Purdue’s starting lineup, Furst doesn’t shoot from the outside, so doubling the post won’t be heavily punished.
-
If Purdue does go smaller for better spacing, Kaufman-Renn is only an okay passer. How he handles the traps remains to be seen, likely the defining story for them (if Kaufman cant get it to shooters even on the smaller lineups its game over).
-
If Kaufman-Renn can pass out of the trap (6’9”, 230 lbs.) He isn’t big enough to overpower our bigs that much; JoJo (Top 5 Finalist for national DPOY) or Francis can likely handle him in isolation respectably if needed. Meanwhile, playing small imposes other costs on Purdue (rebounding).
-
Braden Smith primarily operates in the pick-and-roll, but we’re known for elite screen-trapping and defending passing out the screen, should disrupt his rhythm.
-
Fletcher Loyer and Smith are automatic from three if left open, but Loyer doesn’t create his own shot well, and Smith’s lack of height will ikely prevent lots of clean looks.
-
Purdue likes a four-out offense for spacing, but we’ve historically crushed similar NBA-style spacing teams by large margins.
-
Although Purdue is ranked top 40 nationally in turnover rate, they become turnover-prone against more physical teams (e.g., 16 turnovers vs. Texas A&M, 19 vs. McNeese State). They remind me of Egor Demin at BYU—great passers when comfortable, but prone to heavy turnovers under physcial pressure.
Prediction
- Almost every matchup advantage favors us. Also, Purdue hasn’t faced a team like ours and will likely experience a major adjustment period, especially as they’re not particularly physical.
- The one factor in Purdue’s favor is essentially a home-crowd environment.
- Projected Outcome: Houston wins by around 14 points. These are my two likely scenarios:
- Kaufman-Renn and Purdue’s spacing give us early trouble, we adjust in the second half, and pull away late tot get around 14.
- We jump out to a big lead early, then slow the game and rest players, allowing Purdue to cut it closer, finishing around a 14-point margin.
- We’re built to counter their strengths, while they aren’t built to contain us.
- For Purdue to have a shot, they need us to have a truly off shooting night—something like 3–15 from our trio of LJ, Sharp, and Milos—plus potential foul trouble on our side. Otherwise, we should control this game.
- Also they have a lot of similarities to the the zags (high assist pg - post scoring- spacing - efficient scoring) , but way smaller and less physical but a better shooting team
Note: I obviously feel confident about this one. be cautious i was this confident about Miami 2 tournaments ago… I thought we’d mercilessly out rebound the Miami 4 guard line up with a 6’7 center… and we did not, not everything goes according to how it will look on paper, before looking past to the elite 8 game
