2022/2023 Team Roster

[northside100]

You can call it what you want. Desperation may not be the correct word. But to say Jenkins was in the top 3 or 4 choices for Painter would be disingenuous. I know that's not what you said, but it sounds pretty close.

Everyone talks about how Painter only looks at guys that fit his program. But Jenkins couldn't be further from a good fit for what Purdue needed. He hasn't shown he can play D. He hasn't shown he can score consistently. He hasn't shown he's a ball handler. So other than filling a roster spot where we needed depth, I'm struggling to understand how he's a fit. If that doesn't reek of desperation, I'm not sure what does...

You may be right. Outside of the top two for sure, but those guys were really high level national recruits. Who would you have as 3 or 4 on that list? I just posted above that I'd rather Jenkins than the Llewellyn kid that Michigan signed, Phinessee or IT. I'd maybe rather Eric Hunter than Jenkins but it would depend upon his mindset. IMO Eric's attitude did not help last year's team when he was coming off the bench.

 

[DAG10]

You may be right. Outside of the top two for sure, but those guys were really high level national recruits. Who would you have as 3 or 4 on that list? I just posted above that I'd rather Jenkins than the Llewellyn kid that Michigan signed, Phinessee or IT. I'd maybe rather Eric Hunter than Jenkins but it would depend upon his mindset. IMO Eric's attitude did not help last year's team when he was coming off the bench.

What was wrong with his attitude?

I have another thought on the matter, but, I want to know what was apparently wrong with his attitude before sharing it.

 

[DAG10]

You may be right. Outside of the top two for sure, but those guys were really high level national recruits. Who would you have as 3 or 4 on that list? I just posted above that I'd rather Jenkins than the Llewellyn kid that Michigan signed, Phinessee or IT. I'd maybe rather Eric Hunter than Jenkins but it would depend upon his mindset. IMO Eric's attitude did not help last year's team when he was coming off the bench.

No idea how it will play/turn out, but, in that Painter/Purdue apparently really liked Llewellyn coming out of HS, hard pressed to understand why that might have changed...and, my guess is that UM staff is way more happy about Llewellyn opposed to Jenkins.

 

[northside100]

No idea how it will play/turn out, but, in that Painter/Purdue apparently really liked Llewellyn coming out of HS, hard pressed to understand why that might have changed...and, my guess is that UM staff is way more happy about Llewellyn opposed to Jenkins.

I don't follow your rationale at all that because Purdue 'really liked' Llewellyn as a junior in hs that they liked him better than Jenkins roughly four years later. Doesn't track for me at all. He was a decent Ivy league player who weights 185 soaking wet, is also not a pg and had dreadful efficiency numbers until last year.

I agree that we don't know how it will play out but Jenkins was a much better mid-major player, both more productive and more efficient, as a freshman and sophomore than Llewellyn was in any year at Princeton.

 

[purduepat1969]

You may be right. Outside of the top two for sure, but those guys were really high level national recruits. Who would you have as 3 or 4 on that list? I just posted above that I'd rather Jenkins than the Llewellyn kid that Michigan signed, Phinessee or IT. I'd maybe rather Eric Hunter than Jenkins but it would depend upon his mindset. IMO Eric's attitude did not help last year's team when he was coming off the bench.

Ramey, Hunter, Pack. We struck out with all three of them. There's obviously more, as shown on this list. But those were the best fits for the program.

I'm not trying to bash Jenkins. He may turn out to be a great player for us. But again, if we're talking about the right fit, Jenkins wouldn't have originally been on any list for Purdue. That's where the desperation comes into play because we lost Hunter & IT and didn't land any other transfer...

Ranking college basketball's best transfers for 2022-23: Top 25 players who used the portal to find a new team

The transfer portal was busy this offseason with some talented players finding new homes

www.cbssports.com

 

[DAG10]

I don't follow your rationale at all that because Purdue 'really liked' Llewellyn as a junior in hs that they liked him better than Jenkins roughly four years later. Doesn't track for me at all. He was a decent Ivy league player who weights 185 soaking wet, is also not a pg and had dreadful efficiency numbers until last year.

I agree that we don't know how it will play out but Jenkins was a much better mid-major player, both more productive and more efficient, as a freshman and sophomore than Llewellyn was in any year at Princeton.

I was not saying that they did, and, apparently they did not...I just was surprised that they felt that way...more so in that UM did not.

 

[northside100]

Ramey, Hunter, Pack. We struck out with all three of them. There's obviously more, as shown on this list. But those were the best fits for the program.

I'm not trying to bash Jenkins. He may turn out to be a great player for us. But again, if we're talking about the right fit, Jenkins wouldn't have originally been on any list for Purdue. That's where the desperation comes into play because we lost Hunter & IT and didn't land any other transfer...

Ranking college basketball's best transfers for 2022-23: Top 25 players who used the portal to find a new team

The transfer portal was busy this offseason with some talented players finding new homes

www.cbssports.com

Yes, agree 100% on that Ramey, Hunter and Pack. If the bar is landing the top portal recruits in the country and beating out Arizona, Texas and a huge payday to do so, there is no doubt that we fell short. I'm not sure that we were ever really in plan on Ramey, but on the other two you are absolutely right.

Completely disagree that Jenkins profile was not something that was originally on a list for Purdue. Pack was the number one target and is absolutely an undersized scorer. They needed a guy who can go get his own bucket and Jenkins is absolutely a scorer. Will it translate and will he play defense at the level MP requires? I don't know, but to bill this as a 'desperation' move is hand wringing of the worst sort.

 

[northside100]

I was not saying that they did, and, apparently they did not...I just was surprised that they felt that way...more so in that UM did not.

Fair enough. I wouldn't trust old slappy to evaluate talent outside of being able to read a four and five star recruiting report.

 

[DAG10]

Fair enough. I wouldn't trust old slappy to evaluate talent outside of being able to read a four and five star recruiting report.

I would argue that he did well in recent past with the additions of Smith, Brown and Jones via the portal, all from "small schools".

 

[northside100]

I would argue that he did well in recent past with the additions of Smith, Brown and Jones via the portal, all from "small schools".

Fair point, Smith and Jones both became decent Big Ten starters. Brown was very highly recruited out of high school before committing to Wake. I think slappy has had a number of transfers not work out as well, but I could be making that up, I don't have the data.

 

[purduepat1969]

Yes, agree 100% on that Ramey, Hunter and Pack. If the bar is landing the top portal recruits in the country and beating out Arizona, Texas and a huge payday to do so, there is no doubt that we fell short. I'm not sure that we were ever really in plan on Ramey, but on the other two you are absolutely right.

Completely disagree that Jenkins profile was not something that was originally on a list for Purdue. Pack was the number one target and is absolutely an undersized scorer. They needed a guy who can go get his own bucket and Jenkins is absolutely a scorer. Will it translate and will he play defense at the level MP requires? I don't know, but to bill this as a 'desperation' move is hand wringing of the worst sort.

His history doesn't show he's the kind of player that can go get his own bucket. He had more 3 point than 2 point attempts at all of his previous schools, but especially at Utah, where he attempted 1.9 two pointers and 4.3 three pointers per game.

This, coupled with his historical lack of defense, makes me question why he's a fit.

Again, maybe desperation is not the correct word. But to say this guy's profile was on any list for Purdue is really stretching it.

 

[DAG10]

Fair point, Smith and Jones both became decent Big Ten starters. Brown was very highly recruited out of high school before committing to Wake. I think slappy has had a number of transfers not work out as well, but I could be making that up, I don't have the data.

Absent Smith and Brown, they are not in E8 in '21, and, absent Jones, they don't make the tournament last year. Unrelated (but not), what if Nojel had ended up there as he had hoped to? That is probably an entire topic thread of its own🤦‍♂️...and one I have no interest at all in admittedly.

I am sure he has had misses too likely...he has been way more active in it.

Painter/Purdue chose to stay away from it a year ago, and, in hindsight...it hurt...maybe even more so given what happened ultimately after in losing both experienced PGs that it had. They had to be involved this year, and, it did not go well...some of that was out of their control (Pack), but, some of it was on them.

 

[northside100]

Absent Smith and Brown, they are not in E8 in '21, and, absent Jones, they don't make the tournament last year. Unrelated (but not), what if Nojel had ended up there as he had hoped to? That is probably an entire topic thread of its own🤦‍♂️...and one I have no interest at all in admittedly.

I am sure he has had misses too likely...he has been way more active in it.

Painter/Purdue chose to stay away from it a year ago, and, in hindsight...it hurt...maybe even more so given what happened ultimately after in losing both experienced PGs that it had. They had to be involved this year, and, it did not go well...some of that was out of their control (Pack), but, some of it was on them.

Not sure who would have been willing to come to Purdue last season given the depth chart. If your argument is that Purdue is not well positioned to recruit this type of player I'd agree.

 

[DAG10]

Not sure who would have been willing to come to Purdue last season given the depth chart. If your argument is that Purdue is not well positioned to recruit this type of player I'd agree.

Thing is, with what happened (and, has happened), in hindsight...someone may have had a much easier time finding their way to the floor than thought seemingly. Like say, if it realized during (or after) the season that they were not going to accomplish what they had hoped with the two guys that were there, had they pursued someone, things may not have been what they appeared to be or seemed.

We agree on the latter point.

 

[northside100]

His history doesn't show he's the kind of player that can go get his own bucket. He had more 3 point than 2 point attempts at all of his previous schools, but especially at Utah, where he attempted 1.9 two pointers and 4.3 three pointers per game.

This, coupled with his historical lack of defense, makes me question why he's a fit.

Again, maybe desperation is not the correct word. But to say this guy's profile was on any list for Purdue is really stretching it.

He is a shooter first and foremost. He's not going to create his own shot in the same way that Jaden did, but he does a nice job of using a shot fake to create an open shot.

From a talent versus fit perspective, I see him as a poor man's Pack, who wasn't really exactly what Purdue needed but was so talented that you take him anyway if you can get him. Far more questions than Pack, but can really score the ball.

 

[purduepat1969]

He is a shooter first and foremost. He's not going to create his own shot in the same way that Jaden did, but he does a nice job of using a shot fake to create an open shot.

From a talent versus fit perspective, I see him as a poor man's Pack, who wasn't really exactly what Purdue needed but was so talented that you take him anyway if you can get him. Far more questions than Pack, but can really score the ball.

I hope you're right. We're going to need some scoring from the backcourt by all means.

 

[northside100]

I hope you're right. We're going to need some scoring from the backcourt by all means.

We’ve definitely been spoiled by Carsen and Jaden. I don’t think this team has that type of scorer but I think it has a bunch of guys who can hit open shots, some guys who can really pass, hopefully a couple of guys in Newman and Jenkins who can shoot on the move off of screen actions and hopefully some guys in Loyer and Jenkins who are crafty enough to create off of shot fakes, pull ups, etc.

Too many “hopefully’s’ for my taste but not many programs lose as many guys off of last years team as we did and not have some questions.

 

[tjreese]

Agree, it's all about efficiency, solid defense and playing a role for that type of player.

EVERY single player has a role...every player. That role is expanded for some more than others, but every player has a role and that role is not only an individual role due to capabilities, but considered within the other players roles due to their capabilities. That may be a better way of expressing my original post.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

EVERY single player has a role...every player. That role is expanded for some more than others, but every player has a role and that role is not only an individual role due to capabilities, but considered within the other players roles due to their capabilities. That may be a better way of expressing my original post.

Just looking for building blocks - I'll be delighted if this team can run the offense and transition opportunities improving on valuing each possession and limiting careless mistakes. Not sure what the defense will look like yet.

We shall see.

 

[northside100]

EVERY single player has a role...every player. That role is expanded for some more than others, but every player has a role and that role is not only an individual role due to capabilities, but considered within the other players roles due to their capabilities. That may be a better way of expressing my original post.

Love this post. This is where Painter excels and many others (IU) generally don't get it. It's not just an accumulation of talent, it's how the pieces fit together and the players willingness to take on roles that may not be glamorous but help the team win.

Everyone on the floor with Zach this year will need to compliment Zach as he'll be the focus on offense and targeted on defense. It's not just throw out your best five and hope for the best. When Zach is not on the floor the overall approach and role of each player will need to shift.

 

[tjreese]

Just looking for building blocks - I'll be delighted if this team can run the offense and transition opportunities improving on valuing each possession and limiting careless mistakes. Not sure what the defense will look like yet.

We shall see.

True, we won't know for a few weeks, but I think this team will play closer to their current abilities as players. We won't see the huge shifts in play from outstanding to brain dead in few minutes. This team has a lot of key players that have winning backgrounds. They know how to win and it is just a matter of adjustment to the Big in the timelines offered. It won't surprise me that we find a player that many think shouldn't start that does for that chemistry of the mix of players at the time.

With my black and gold glasses on I think that towards the end of the year Purdue is capable of beating any team in the Big!

 

[bonefish1]

Love this post. This is where Painter excels and many others (IU) generally don't get it. It's not just an accumulation of talent, it's how the pieces fit together and the players willingness to take on roles that may not be glamorous but help the team win.

Everyone on the floor with Zach this year will need to compliment Zach as he'll be the focus on offense and targeted on defense. It's not just throw out your best five and hope for the best. When Zach is not on the floor the overall approach and role of each player will need to shift.

Do you think iu will reach another FF before Painter?

 

[DAG10]

True, we won't know for a few weeks, but I think this team will play closer to their current abilities as players. We won't see the huge shifts in play from outstanding to brain dead in few minutes. This team has a lot of key players that have winning backgrounds. They know how to win and it is just a matter of adjustment to the Big in the timelines offered. It won't surprise me that we find a player that many think shouldn't start that does for that chemistry of the mix of players at the time.

With my black and gold glasses on I think that towards the end of the year Purdue is capable of beating any team in the Big!

It would be nice if it is the case, but, there are some really, really big questions in the backcourt, and, it is still a question as to whether Edey can not just hold up for extended minutes, but, stay out of foul trouble as well.

Kaufman-Renn is such a wild card...

 

[DAG10]

Love this post. This is where Painter excels and many others (IU) generally don't get it. It's not just an accumulation of talent, it's how the pieces fit together and the players willingness to take on roles that may not be glamorous but help the team win.

Everyone on the floor with Zach this year will need to compliment Zach as he'll be the focus on offense and targeted on defense. It's not just throw out your best five and hope for the best. When Zach is not on the floor the overall approach and role of each player will need to shift.

There are a lot of talent conglomerations that have done well in March...far better than teams fitting pieces together and lacking said overall talent.

 

[DAG10]

Just looking for building blocks - I'll be delighted if this team can run the offense and transition opportunities improving on valuing each possession and limiting careless mistakes. Not sure what the defense will look like yet.

We shall see.

Hard pressed to feel like Purdue got better defensively from a personnel-standpoint...and, that is concerning, especially with respect to what happened a year ago.

I agree on your other points.

 

[northside100]

There are a lot of talent conglomerations that have done well in March...far better than teams fitting pieces together and lacking said overall talent.

Totally agree. Do you think that Matt Painter is the primary blocker to Purdue aggregating that level of talent?

 

[tjreese]

It would be nice if it is the case, but, there are some really, really big questions in the backcourt, and, it is still a question as to whether Edey can not just hold up for extended minutes, but, stay out of foul trouble as well.

Kaufman-Renn is such a wild card...

So their abilities are what they are. I doubt we see the extremes of smart solid play and brain dead play as much showing a very talented team and then one that is not very good a few times inside the same game...that was what I intended to be understood.

I realize I have black and gold glasses, but I think this team is going to be good towards the end of the year. I understand all the questions losing all Purdue did AND it was a lot...fully get that...very understandable. I just think the unknowns will be pretty good with time and understand how most would be hesitant. The talent, skill levels and experience lost should make everyone uneasy, but I see talent never displayed, and intelligent, savvy play from "team" winners with something to prove. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but I really think Purdue will be pretty good later in the year...even with all that was lost and the inexperience of the team. I look forward to watching the growth as do many Boilers

 

[northside100]

So their abilities are what they are. I doubt we see the extremes of smart solid play and brain dead play as much showing a very talented team and then one that is not very good a few times inside the same game...that was what I intended to be understood.

I realize I have black and gold glasses, but I think this team is going to be good towards the end of the year. I understand all the questions losing all Purdue did AND it was a lot...fully get that...very understandable. I just think the unknowns will be pretty good with time and understand how most would be hesitant. The talent, skill levels and experience lost should make everyone uneasy, but I see talent never displayed, and intelligent, savvy play from "team" winners with something to prove. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but I really think Purdue will be pretty good later in the year...even with all that was lost and the inexperience of the team. I look forward to watching the growth as do many Boilers

Huge range of outcomes from this team IMO. I don't understand folks who are convinced that the backcourt will be bad and the overall team will struggle, but right to call out that there are a huge number of questions. I have this team pegged as second tier in the BT (4th to 6th place finish) with an outstanding front court and middle of the pack back court, but could see them finishing as high as second or third or on the flip side as an NCAAT bubble team.

 

[northside100]

Do you think iu will reach another FF before Painter?

That's an excellent question. I think there's a very real chance that neither IU or Purdue make a FF before Painter retires. Do I think that Painter is more likely to make a FF than IU before he retires? I think so, but it's a toss up.

I do think that MP would have a significantly better chance of making a FF at IU than he does at Purdue, although that dynamic seems to be shifting.

 

[DAG10]

Totally agree. Do you think that Matt Painter is the primary blocker to Purdue aggregating that level of talent?

A part of it, yes...other things that go/play into it (including staff).

 

[DAG10]

So their abilities are what they are. I doubt we see the extremes of smart solid play and brain dead play as much showing a very talented team and then one that is not very good a few times inside the same game...that was what I intended to be understood.

I realize I have black and gold glasses, but I think this team is going to be good towards the end of the year. I understand all the questions losing all Purdue did AND it was a lot...fully get that...very understandable. I just think the unknowns will be pretty good with time and understand how most would be hesitant. The talent, skill levels and experience lost should make everyone uneasy, but I see talent never displayed, and intelligent, savvy play from "team" winners with something to prove. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but I really think Purdue will be pretty good later in the year...even with all that was lost and the inexperience of the team. I look forward to watching the growth as do many Boilers

Like say...hope that you are right and hope that it happens.

There is still talent on this team for sure, and, some really good basketball players as well...there are just a lot of questions and unknowns unfortunately, and, a potential huge issue in the backcourt (in part, self-created).

It will be interesting certainly to see how things unfold...won't be long before things get going and the season is here.

 

[DAG10]

Huge range of outcomes from this team IMO. I don't understand folks who are convinced that the backcourt will be bad and the overall team will struggle, but right to call out that there are a huge number of questions. I have this team pegged as second tier in the BT (4th to 6th place finish) with an outstanding front court and middle of the pack back court, but could see them finishing as high as second or third or on the flip side as an NCAAT bubble team.

Not sure how anyone could be convinced of anything with respect to this team really.

Without putting a lot of time or thought into it, I would guess that you are probably right with where you have them projected going in.

If it were to be a bubble team, that would be disappointing admittedly.

 

[DAG10]

That's an excellent question. I think there's a very real chance that neither IU or Purdue make a FF before Painter retires. Do I think that Painter is more likely to make a FF than IU before he retires? I think so, but it's a toss up.

I do think that MP would have a significantly better chance of making a FF at IU than he does at Purdue, although that dynamic seems to be shifting.

I am more in line with your first thought that neither gets there during his remaining time at Purdue, although, I agree that his chances would have been better there than at Purdue...not sure what dynamic you see shifting.

 

[northside100]

I am more in line with your first thought that neither gets there during his remaining time at Purdue, although, I agree that his chances would have been better there than at Purdue...not sure what dynamic you see shifting.

I think Purdue is becoming a more acceptable choice for high level recruits. Purdue has landed a bunch of kids the last few years (Newman, Ivey, Morton, TKR, Furst, Colvin) that IU would have liked to have had. That's happened at times in the past but IMO not as consistently and very rarely with players from southern IN.

 

[DAG10]

I think Purdue is becoming a more acceptable choice for high level recruits. Purdue has landed a bunch of kids the last few years (Newman, Ivey, Morton, TKR, Furst, Colvin) that IU would have liked to have had. That's happened at times in the past but IMO not as consistently and very rarely with players from southern IN.

Agree...it had best figure something out pretty quickly with respect to NIL, however, for it to remain the case.

And, that also is in part because who is at Purdue, and, who was at Indinia.

 

[mathboy]

That's an excellent question. I think there's a very real chance that neither IU or Purdue make a FF before Painter retires. Do I think that Painter is more likely to make a FF than IU before he retires? I think so, but it's a toss up.

I do think that MP would have a significantly better chance of making a FF at IU than he does at Purdue, although that dynamic seems to be shifting.

We will not be a bubble team this year. Far too much talent on this team. We will have a solid NCAA bid.

 

[northside100]

We will not be a bubble tea this year. Far too much talent on this team. We will have a solid NCAA bid.

I agree that that is the most likely outcome. I don't see it as a certainty.

 

[SCBoiler1]

So their abilities are what they are. I doubt we see the extremes of smart solid play and brain dead play as much showing a very talented team and then one that is not very good a few times inside the same game...that was what I intended to be understood.

I realize I have black and gold glasses, but I think this team is going to be good towards the end of the year. I understand all the questions losing all Purdue did AND it was a lot...fully get that...very understandable. I just think the unknowns will be pretty good with time and understand how most would be hesitant. The talent, skill levels and experience lost should make everyone uneasy, but I see talent never displayed, and intelligent, savvy play from "team" winners with something to prove. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but I really think Purdue will be pretty good later in the year...even with all that was lost and the inexperience of the team. I look forward to watching the growth as do many Boilers

"but I see talent never displayed"

Psychic!!!

 

[SCBoiler1]

Everyone has the right to their opinion but I tend to base my opinion on prior results. With this team there aren't many prior results to go by and on this team Edey, Gillis and maybe Furst are the only ones who have put up meaningful stats.

Collectively we have a lot of other guys but when you break down each player individually their results to date are inconsistent at best.

Jenkins: Shot under 40% from the field and had more turnovers than assists the last two years. His effective field goal percentage was about 51%. Only Newman had a lower effective field goal percentage and no one else on the Purdue roster was less than 53% last year.

Newman: Showed great promise as a redshirt freshman but he still shot less than 40% from the field and his effective field goal percentage was less than 50%. Last year he shot 32% from the field with and effective field goal percentage of 45%. For reference IT and Hunter shot 44% and 46% from the field and had 60% and 56% effective field goal percentages.

Morton: Plays good enough D and doesn't turn the ball over but can he be a consistent scorer? He's averaged 1.7 points per game the last two years.

Then we have 6 freshman that haven't played a game. A few of them will turn out to be good/great players for Purdue but I don't know how anyone can predict who until we see them play a few college games, I don't think we've had a guard at Purdue since E Moore that has come in and been a significant difference maker on day 1. You could tell both CE and Ivey were going to be good but both struggled periodically their freshmen year.

Edey is good enough to make us competitive enough in the B1G. If Purdue wants to challenge for a B1G crown and get a decent seed, we're going to need a couple of these guys to play better than what realistically can be expected.

 

[northside100]

P

Everyone has the right to their opinion but I tend to base my opinion on prior results. With this team there aren't many prior results to go by and on this team Edey, Gillis and maybe Furst are the only ones who have put up meaningful stats.

Collectively we have a lot of other guys but when you break down each player individually their results to date are inconsistent at best.

Jenkins: Shot under 40% from the field and had more turnovers than assists the last two years. His effective field goal percentage was about 51%. Only Newman had a lower effective field goal percentage and no one else on the Purdue roster was less than 53% last year.

Newman: Showed great promise as a redshirt freshman but he still shot less than 40% from the field and his effective field goal percentage was less than 50%. Last year he shot 32% from the field with and effective field goal percentage of 45%. For reference IT and Hunter shot 44% and 46% from the field and had 60% and 56% effective field goal percentages.

Morton: Plays good enough D and doesn't turn the ball over but can he be a consistent scorer? He's averaged 1.7 points per game the last two years.

Then we have 6 freshman that haven't played a game. A few of them will turn out to be good/great players for Purdue but I don't know how anyone can predict who until we see them play a few college games, I don't think we've had a guard at Purdue since E Moore that has come in and been a significant difference maker on day 1. You could tell both CE and Ivey were going to be good but both struggled periodically their freshmen year.

Edey is good enough to make us competitive enough in the B1G. If Purdue wants to challenge for a B1G crown and get a decent seed, we're going to need a couple of these guys to play better thuan what realistically can be expected.

I agree with your overall assessment, i.e. some young or unproven guys will have to really step up and do things they haven't before for Purdue to be a real contender.

In my opinion the performance and statistical view that you provide on individual players above is at such a high level as to be of no use at all. This guys does a great job of breaking down Bandon and Zach in much more detail:

Brandon Newman: A Purdue Boilermaker On A Mission

Brandon Newman looks to bounce back after what was a rocky sophomore campaign. With more playing time available, Purdue will look to lean on him to score from the perimeter.

cbbreview.com