BLOOMINGTON — Purdue basketball spent the first half of the season establishing a new baseline expectation on the boards.
Falling short of that expectation in Tuesday’s 72-67 loss at IU contributed to coach Matt Painter’s disgruntled postgame mood.
Advertisement
“We outrebounded by five,” Painter said. “We should have outrebounded by 15. It’s just frustrating.”
Painter spoke to the specific circumstances of that loss. It did not take many missed defensive rebounds to magnify the defensive lapses which pushed IU to its fourth win in the last five rivalry games in Bloomington.
It surely did not help the IU loss came on the heels of the Boilermakers’ worst rebounding game of the season in a home loss to Illinois. Painter could lump rebounding in with other trends contributing to performance leakage and a three-game losing streak.
Purdue was a rebounding revelation in the first half of the season. The addition of Oscar Cluff, the return of Daniel Jacobsen and Trey Kaufman-Renn’s more favorable matchups at the 4 spot combined to address last season’s shortcomings on the boards — and then some.
Advertisement
The final 10 games of Big Ten play may reveal whether strong rebounding is part of the Boilers’ actual identity, or merely an illusion of the nonconference season.
Financial report: Purdue Athletics operates at surplus despite spending more gold
Offensive rebounding even more important for Purdue basketball
Purdue may never rise to the level of one of the nation’s top defensive teams. For the bulk of any given game, it puts two defensive 5s. Defending matchups with shooters and defending certain plays in space can be problematic.
For the first half of this season, though, that same frontcourt offset that vulnerability by playing at a lights-out level on the offensive boards.
Advertisement
The Boilermakers posted an offensive rebounding percentage of 36.7% or higher in 10 of their first 12 games. (In other words, it rebounded over a third of its own missed shots.) They topped 40% in half of those games. Some of the most impressive victories of the season came with big performances on the offensive glass: Alabama (47.5%), Memphis (42.4%), Texas Tech (38.5%) and Auburn (39.1%).
Cluff and Kaufman-Renn thrived in tandem, both ranking among the national leaders in offensive rebounding percentage. A team already boasting one of the nation’s best point guards in Braden Smith and numerous strong 3-point shooters utilized second chances to lead the nation in offensive efficiency.
Since Christmas, however, Purdue only once posted an offensive rebounding percentage above 32.6%. (That came at UCLA, with 39.4% in a loss.)
Purdue ranks third among all Big Ten teams in offensive rebound percentage. However, superlative performances in nonconference play prop up that ranking. When using data from only conference games, the Boilers rank ninth.
Advertisement
Performance metrics suggest Purdue is essentially the same defensive team as last season. If so, stealing points will be critical.
Insider: Purdue basketball needs ‘better resolve’ to get past mental breaks to salvage season
How Alabama win, Illinois loss show tales of Purdue’s rebounding
With the notable exception of the loss to Illinois, defensive rebounding has held fairly constant as a strength. Only Michigan State ranks better in securing defensive boards in Big Ten play.
In this post-holiday stretch, Purdue has played three of the nation’s top 16 teams in 3-point shooting volume: Indiana (seventh), Wisconsin (ninth) and Illinois (16th).
Advertisement
That typically creates atypical rebounds — long caroms for which positioning and height help less than hustle and toughness. After Tuesday’s loss, Boilermaker players conceded IU beat them to more loose balls in critical stretches of the game.
“That’s what a lot of people sometimes don’t understand,” Painter said. “Especially teams that shoot a lot of 3s, it’s the people that are quicker to the ball. It’s not always size at the rim, because balls were squirting out.
“They’re making long rebounds. Indiana obviously in the first half was quicker to the ball.”
Purdue went to a smaller lineup in the second half against IU, moving Kaufman-Renn to center and playing Jack Benter at the 4. Painter wanted Benter’s defensive versatility against IU’s shooters.
Advertisement
Against a team with IU’s offensive style, that lineup might even have some rebounding advantages. That frontcourt will never play together for 40 minutes, though. The team’s conventional lineups need a better answer when winning the boards means winning on 50-50 balls.
As with offensive rebounding, Purdue has seen itself succeed in those circumstances.
Doyel: IU basketball is rising up under Darian DeVries, while Purdue is falling apart
Alabama ranks fourth nationally by attempting 3s on 53.2% of its shots. The Crimson Tide chucked up 43 of them at Coleman Coliseum on Nov. 13. Yet Purdue posted one of its best defensive rebounding percentages of the season, 82.5%.
Advertisement
Nearly three months have passed since that night in Tuscaloosa. More than two months have passed since the beatdown of Auburn at Gainbridge Fieldhouse.
In order for Purdue to rediscover that early season form It needs to re-assert itself on the boards.
Nathan Baird and Sam King have the best Purdue sports coverage, and sign up for IndyStar’s Boilermakers newsletter.
This article originally appeared on Indianapolis Star: Purdue basketball rebounding slips during losing streak, defense mismatches
