Is this the best team Purdue has put on the hardwood???
- Thread starter ddmills333
- Start date
At this early stage in the season - yes. Purdue teams always get better as the season goes on. We will see if this one does also.
73.4% front the line
36.6 from the 3
46-32 rebounds per game
1.3-1 assists to turnovers
Pretty impressive team numbers to start the season out and against some pretty good competition overall...
I knew we were going to be good starting the season out, but I'm on the train and believing we may have the tool to contend for the NT...
How awesome would it be to finally hang that banner!!!!!
Boiler up!
36.6 from the 3
46-32 rebounds per game
1.3-1 assists to turnovers
Pretty impressive team numbers to start the season out and against some pretty good competition overall...
I knew we were going to be good starting the season out, but I'm on the train and believing we may have the tool to contend for the NT...
How awesome would it be to finally hang that banner!!!!!
Boiler up!
Three point % would be a lot better without Kendall's 1-6,1-7 s. Still pretty impressive numbers though.
Boiler up!!!
Got to beat Butler at Bankers Life. Purdue overall has not played well there. Put a spanking on the Bulldogs and we can talk a little louder. Another loss to them would be pretty deflating in this state.
The best Purdue team I've ever seen was the 2008-2009 squad just before Hummel's injury. In fact, it's probably the only time you could have ever asked to pick one team in college basketball that I thought would win the title and I could've objectively picked Purdue. They were a well-oiled machine at that point and were mowing down top conference competitors on the road. This team is deeper than that one but that doesn't make it better in my opinion.
RPI has our SOS at 123. I know it's not super accurate this early, but it should still give pause to all the people on this board just repeating how great this team is. I'm not saying we aren't good, but I still don't think we have been tested enough to say things like this.
Let's get through the butler/vandy/@whiskey stretch and then see where we shake out. If we trounce all those teams by double digits then I'm full on homer vision.
Agree with TC4THREE Kramer's senior year with juniors Hummel, JJ, 'Twan, and the rest prior to Robbie's knee was the best I've seen a PURDUE team play in a very long time. They were just cutting up very good teams. Early though, this team has the mix to take it to that level.
Pretty good. I'm just not ready yet to put them in the same conversation with a team that had Mount, Keller, Gilliam, Blalock et al and made it to the Final Four.
Think that was 2009-2010 year, but you make good points. That was an excellent squad, and we all know what happened unfortunately.
I've seen a fair amount of teams play.....JMHO, but the 86/87 and 87/88 teams were the best I've seen....although neither finished the year well enough.Unfortunately I have to give 2010 an incomplete, although I'm glad I got to see them play Duke in Houston that year.
To answer the OP's question about best team, I think it could be. When Hummel whent down in 2010 I knew our road was going to next to impossible without him. This team is most likley be able to lose a guy and our chances at beating anyone are still good. They one guy that would hurt us the most is CS.
You're right. Was a year off. For some reason I had it in my mind it was their sophomore year when I posted that but it certainly was their junior season.
Well.....RH did have the back issues he dealt with the year before......early in conference season.
We need to get our shooting to be more consistent. We have had some very cold nights from deep, and against elite teams we are likely to lose if that happens. I can't say the team is worthy of the "best ever" conversation until we are consistently performing at least ok from deep (& at best lights out, which we have already seen).
Also, as others have said, we need to beat some ranked teams, and do very well in conference. And arguably the team has to at least match the best post-season performances of the modern era, so a FF appearance. Our school has had some excellent teams in its history. It takes a full season to know where this team sits among them.
Also, as others have said, we need to beat some ranked teams, and do very well in conference. And arguably the team has to at least match the best post-season performances of the modern era, so a FF appearance. Our school has had some excellent teams in its history. It takes a full season to know where this team sits among them.
The deepest team I can remember during the last 30 years and finally a Purdue team that has a killer instinct that we have lacked. We keep the heel of the boot on the throat.
I didn't see the Mount teams or Wooden teams...I expect they were both solid and would be in this discussion. The one team that gets overlooked is the 3 amigos on 88. That team was a machine and inexplicably fell apart against KSU...I personally believe Keady blew that game. Regardless this is the first team since 88 I believe could win it all. I loved the Hummel teams but never thought a team with 2 guys basically refusing to score was a great team.
Like others have said I have to see more before I get into the conversation of best ever at PU. I'm excited and enjoying this team very much but until we play and beat some high quality teams I will reserve judgement.
The best team I saw was my Junior and Senior years, 87 and 88. The three amigos and company were very good and won the Big Ten back to back against a very strong league when you had to play home and home against everybody.
If this years team wins the conference and makes a nice run in the tournament, I will be more than happy to discuss them as the best ever!
The best team I saw was my Junior and Senior years, 87 and 88. The three amigos and company were very good and won the Big Ten back to back against a very strong league when you had to play home and home against everybody.
If this years team wins the conference and makes a nice run in the tournament, I will be more than happy to discuss them as the best ever!
Way too early for this thread. First and most important, we need to wait and see if this is Painters best team.
BINGO. From Hardwoodhistory.com
"
The peak of Mount’s Purdue career came when he was a junior, in the 1968-69 season. “The Rocket” averaged 33.3 ppg to again lead the Big Ten (he finished second nationally to Pete Maravich); he was a consensus First-Team All American; and he was chosen Big Ten Player of the Year. Most importantly, however, Mount helped Purdue earn its first NCAA tournament berth ever. The Boilermakers went 13-1 in league play, waxing second-place Illinois and Ohio State by a full four games. Their only conference loss: 88-85 at Ohio State. Overall, Purdue finished 23-5 and led the NCAA in scoring at 93 ppg. In their final regular-season game, Purdue blitzed Indiana 120-76, setting a still-standing school record for points in a game.
As Big Ten champs, Purdue got a bye in the first round of the 1969 NCAA Tournament. In the Mideast Regional Semis, they steamrolled Miami (OH) 91-71, as Mount scored 32. Next up: Marquette in the Regional Finals. Mount didn’t play well, hitting only 11 of his 32 shot attempts and finishing with 26 points — but he hit the game-winning basket as time expired in overtime; Purdue won 75-73 and moved on to the Final Four. There, in the national semis, they smoked North Carolina 92-65, putting the game away with a 53-30 second-half rout. Mount was back on his game, hitting half of his 28 shot attempts and ending the contest with 36 points.
The victory over UNC meant a rematch with defending champion UCLA in the finals. Purdue opened the ’68-’69 regular season with a 94-82 loss to the Bruins at Pauley Pavilion, the back end of a home-and-home series that began with the first game at Mackey the previous season. Mount had 33 points as Bruin Kenny Heitz was helpless against “The Rocket’s” barrage. The NCAA final game would be a much different story — except for the outcome. In his final collegiate game, Lew Alcindor scored 37 points (24 in the first half) and pulled down 20 rebounds as the Bruins pasted Purdue, 92-72. Heitz didn’t score in the finals — but it was his defense on Mount that propelled UCLA to victory. Mount finished with 28 points, but most of them came in “garbage time” late in the second half, as Heitz hounded him into a 12-for-36 shooting night, including 14 misses in a row. The greatest season in Boilermaker basketball history ended in disappointment, but nobody could blame Rick Mount."
RPI is "not super accurate"? RPI is meaningless this early. For example, Incarnate Word is ranked #27, with the #1 SOS. Not only are they 0-2 against DI opponents, their three wins were against DIII teams!
Also, Valpo is ranked #2, with an SOS ranking of #2. Does this look like a #2 SOS:
97 Nov. 13 IPFW W 78-64
46 Nov. 15 Iona W 83-58
166 Nov. 17 @ Rhode Island W 58-55
-- Nov. 18 IU-Kokomo W 78-40
-- Nov. 19 Trinity (IL) W 89-42
18 Nov. 22 @ Oregon L 67-73
29 Nov. 24 @ Oregon State W 63-57
163 Nov. 28 @ Ball State L 66-69
82 Dec. 3 Belmont W 61-57
Two of those games weren't even DI teams.
About all the RPI is good for right now is a mild chuckle.
Last edited:
I believe Purdue's starting center that year was 6'11 Chuck Bavis who was built like Issac. IIRC he was injured for the final and we had to go with 7' Jerry Johnson. Johnson was built a lot more like JJ and Alcindor had a field day with him.
The Three Amigos squad in '87-'88 was a legitimate national championship contender, if not favorite by more than some...no doubt one of the top three of four teams in the country that year.
The '97-98 Purdue team was playing as well as anyone in the country and was a legitimate top 5 team in the country before Jaraan Cornell sprained his ankle against IU....the game before that against OSU in Columbus they put on a clinic and dismantled OSU and they were hitting on all cylinders before Cornell went down.
Had Hummel not tore his ACL in Minnesota and Purdue defeated MSU the following Sunday in Mackey, they would have staked claim to the top spot in the polls...and that team, like the one mentioned above, was as good as any in the country and playing its best basketball as well when that unfortunate injury occurred...had he stayed healthy, that team also had a legitimate opportunity to win a National Championship.
This team is arguably the deepest Purdue team in modern times...and one of the most talented, although it lacks the premier talent that some of those other teams had at the top of its roster...more talented overall than those other teams perhaps, but it still has some question marks...more I would contend than those other teams already referenced did. Ultimately, it needs to be better defensively, and it needs to prove itself capable of knocking down shots with consistency from the perimeter.
The '97-98 Purdue team was playing as well as anyone in the country and was a legitimate top 5 team in the country before Jaraan Cornell sprained his ankle against IU....the game before that against OSU in Columbus they put on a clinic and dismantled OSU and they were hitting on all cylinders before Cornell went down.
Had Hummel not tore his ACL in Minnesota and Purdue defeated MSU the following Sunday in Mackey, they would have staked claim to the top spot in the polls...and that team, like the one mentioned above, was as good as any in the country and playing its best basketball as well when that unfortunate injury occurred...had he stayed healthy, that team also had a legitimate opportunity to win a National Championship.
This team is arguably the deepest Purdue team in modern times...and one of the most talented, although it lacks the premier talent that some of those other teams had at the top of its roster...more talented overall than those other teams perhaps, but it still has some question marks...more I would contend than those other teams already referenced did. Ultimately, it needs to be better defensively, and it needs to prove itself capable of knocking down shots with consistency from the perimeter.
Not sayin its the best but the 1978-79 squad was a BIG10 champ with future NBA players that included, JB Carroll, longtime solid NBA journyman, Jerry Sichting, solid NBA shooting guard, Keith Edmonson (20 ppg av in 5yrs). 15 yr European pro, Arnette Hallman, Rosey Barnes -NFL, etc-Lee Rose coached team that got shafted to NIT before massive expansion of NCAA tourney
I
I
Agree this thread is way too early but still fun. I will always be partial to the '94 team. They could've won it all.
Not sure it is too early to discuss although I agree it is too early to crown anyone (not saying anyone is.)
This team lacks the go to guy that many of the teams that have been discussed. They make up for that with depth that I do not think existed on any of the other teams mentioned. At this point I think I like that.
I think that we have all the pieces to be special this year. We have guys who have shown they can score bunches. We have guys that get rebounds. We have good ball handlers and passers. We have more guys with a high basketball IQ that I remember ever being discussed.
We also have guys that go cold, guys that can make ill-advised passes, guys that can be out of position on the boards, or out of position in general, etc.
So far we have had far more of the good than that bad (OK at least more if not far more.)
I love the attitude and even more the fun these guys are having. I have yet to see anyone hanging their head on the bench this year. I did see that last year.
Every time I see something exciting on the floor I see an engaged bench (love the reaction by Haas among others.)
We have shown we are good so far, Florida and Pitt are getting votes in the polls. With Butler and Vandy currently ranked still coming up OOC, we will have the opportunity to improve our eye appeal.
And with the conference schedule we have that includes TWO top ten teams and two more getting votes and several more that have been ranked and could be again before conference play, we will not go out and hide in an easy schedule. We will have the opportunity to PROVE whether we are one of the best or not.
Love talking about whether we are one of the best teams in the nation instead of whether we could beat one or two teams to keep from being last in the B1G for a second season.
I put this on the other board. I thought it was interesting.
There has been quite a bit of discussion on the boards about our 3 point shooting and who is/was the best team you've seen play at Purdue. I thought I would look up the stats from our first 3 games of 2009-2010 and compare them to our first 8 games this year. Here is a break down of our 3 point shooting for our first 8 games in 2009-2010.
9-24 (38%) as a team from 3 (CS Northridge)
Hummel 3-5
Moore 1-4
Grant 0-2
Byrd 3-6
Smith 2-4
2-14 (14%) as a team from 3 (SD St)
Hummel 0-4
Grant 1-4
Moore 0-3
Byrd 0-1
Smith 1-2
8-24 (33%) as a team from 3 (St Joe)
Hummel 1-3
Grant 1-3
Moore 0-2
Byrd 1-4
Smith 3-5
4-16 (25%) as a team from 3 (#9 Tenn)
Hummel 1-6
Grant 0-2
Moore 2-5
Byrd 0-0
Smith 0-2
5-16 (31%) as a team from 3 (CMU)
Hummel 1-3
Grant 0-2
Moore 1-4
Byrd 0-1
Smith 2-4
1-15 (7%) as a team from 3 (Wake)
Hummel 0-6
Grant 0-3
Moore 1-3
Byrd 0-0
Smith 0-2
12-24 (50%) as a team from 3 (Buffalo)
Hummel 1-6
Grant 0-2
Moore 2-3
Byrd 2-3
Smith 2-3
10-22 (46%) as a team from 3 (Valpo)
Hummel 3-3
Grant 1-5
Moore 5-6
Byrd 0-2
Smith 0-2
We shot 51-155 = 33%
Hummel 10-36 = 28%
Grant 3-23 = 13%
Moore 12-30 = 40% (29% going into game 8)
Byrd 6-17 = 35%
Smith 10-22 = 45%
The starters (Hummel, Grant, and Moore) shot 25-89 = 28% from 3
Here are this years numbers.
12-31 (39%) as a team from 3 (NCAT)
Edwards 1-3
Swanigan 1-3
Davis 1-3
Cline 4-6
Stephens 4-10
Mathias 0-1
PJ 1-4
18-36 (50%) as a team from 3 (Vermont)
Edwards 4-5
Swanigan 2-4
Davis 1-1
Cline 3-7
Stephens 3-8
Mathias 5-7
PJ 0-3
9-21 (43%) as a team from 3 (Incarnate)
Edwards 1-3
Swanigan 1-4
Davis 2-2
Cline 1-4
Stephens 3-3
Mathias 0-4
PJ 1-1
6-20 (30%) as a team from 3 (ODU)
Edwards 0-2
Swanigan 0-2
Davis 0-2
Cline 0-0
Stephens 4-11
Mathias 2-3
PJ 0-0
11-26 (42%) as a team from 3 (Florida)
Edwards 2-3
Swanigan 1-2
Davis 2-5
Cline 0-0
Stephens 0-6
Mathias 2-3
PJ 3-6
4-19 (21%) as a team from 3 (Lehigh)
Edwards 0-3
Swanigan 1-4
Davis DNP
Cline 0-2
Stephens 1-6
Mathias 1-3
PJ 1-1
11-28 (39%) as a team from 3 (Pitt)
Edwards 2-4
Swanigan 0-1
Davis DNP
Cline 4-6
Stephens 1-9
Mathias 1-4
PJ 1-2
3-21 (14%) as a team from 3 (UNM)
Edwards 0-5
Swanigan 0-1
Davis DNP
Cline 1-4
Stephens 2-6
Mathias 0-3
PJ 0-2
We are 74-202 = 37%
Stephens 18-59 = 31%
Cline 13-29 = 45%
Matthias 11-28 = 39%
Edwards 10-28 = 36%
Davis 6-13 = 46%
Biggie 6-21 = 29%
PJ 7-19 = 37%
The starters (Davis, Edwards, and Biggie) are shooting 22-62 = 35% from 3
Comparing the years by the most attempts from 3
Hummel 10-36 for 28 % --- Stephens 18-59 for 31%
Moore 12-30 for 40% --- Cline 13-29 for 45%
Grant 3-23 for 13% --- Edwards 10-28 for 36%
Smith 10-22 for 45% --- Mathias 11-28 for 39%
Byrd 6-17 for 35% --- Biggie 6-21 for 29%
Wohlford 6-9 for 67% --- PJ 7-19 for 37%
Hart 2-6 for 33% --- Davis 6-13 for 46%
Our lowest to highest 3 point % games 2009 - this year
1-15 (7% against Wake) - 3-21 (14% against UNM)
2-14 (14% against SDSt) - 4-19 (21% against Lehigh)
4-16 (25% against Tenn) - 6-20 (30% against ODU)
5-16 (31% against CMU) - 12-31 (39% against NCAT)
8-24 (33% against St Joe) - 11-28 (39% against Pitt)
9-24 (38% against CSNorthridge) - 11-26 (42% against Florida)
10-22 (46% against Valpo) - 9-21 (43% against Incarnate)
12-24 (50% against Buff) - 18-36 (50% against Vermont)
I just found it interesting that the biggest weakness, according to quite a few here, is our 3 point shooting. Usually, the argument has been that the '09-'10 team was a much better shooting/skilled team. According to the first 8 games of each season, it appears that this years team is the better shooting team. Most shocking is that our starters of Davis, Edwards, and Biggie (22-52 for 35%) are shooting a higher 3 point % than the starters that year of Hummel, Moore, and Grant (25-89 for 28%). That really surprised me.
Comparing the starters side by side.
Hummel 10-36 for 28% - Biggie 6-21 for 29%
Moore 12-30 for 40% - Davis 6-13 for 46%
Grant 3-23 for 13% - Edwards 10-28 for 36%
JJ 0-1 for 0% - Haas 0-0 for 0%
Kramer 0-2 for 0% - PJ 7-19 for 37%
You forgot that in the finals someone was sick or injured. Think it was Gilliam-don't remember but, it was a bad blow. Not sure we would have still beaten UCLA but, it was a factor.
Potentially every bit as good as 1969 and 1980. This team is probably deeper just not the "marque" player like Joe Barry and Mount. I REALLY like this TEAM!
Interesting stats GFC; thanks for taking the time to put that together. Doesn't AJH have a couple of threes this year as well.......thought he hit one against FLA and maybe two against Pitt? not that it will skew the stats much.
Sometimes the stats don't tell the whole story. Although I'm not ready to say the 3pt shooting is a strength....I think there is more depth (and thus the opponent has to game plan more for it) with an increase in quality this year, which may be enough. Before, it was lock down KS, and Purdue is in trouble. JMHO (and I have no stats to back this up), but if Ray Davis, any of the wings (KS, DM, VE, RC), and to a lesser extent PJT continue to be reliable to close to 40%......Purdue is going to be really extremely difficult to handle on the offensive end....beyond that, the benefits keep increasing.
I think Chuck Bavis missed the finals in 1969,as he was injured during the Big Ten season.Gilliam had missed some games but played well against North Carolina as he helped control the Tar Heel ace,Charlie Scott.
Hammons is 3-3 on the year I believe. I just didn't add him because he's not technically a starter and he's only taken 3.
I loved the '94 team. Not as balanced but had the go to player of all go to players. We were a night of horseplay in the hotel from going to the final four and winning it all. Big Dog couldnt be stopped by another team. It was his teammate and his self . that stopped him.
I thought about 94 but that was a one man show. But you are right Big Dog could have won it all. My biggest omission was the 78 79 team.
People are saying this team doesn't have its "marquee" player. I would say having the 2 best centers in the conference is something. Also the two best defenders. I think it has potential to be the best but to early. Big Dogs senior year was special. I was certain Hummel's Jr. year we would win until you know what.. Still think this team has the potential to be the best ever just to early to say. Two NBA centers, 3 sharpshooters, 2 hardnosed PGs, 2 lockdown SGs, a do it all SF, and a bruising PF.
Similar threads
