What is pretty clear is that Dent and Booker both played significantly better. What may have gone less noticed is that Purdue didn’t play particularly well. Most notably, TKR logged just 26 minutes. At the time, it was puzzling why Painter didn’t bring him back during a critical stretch, but it later came out that he’s dealing with a nagging injury. His recent performances haven’t been at his usual level. Against suc he played only 24 minutes and scored five points- way below is averages.
None of this is meant to take anything away from Donnie or Xavier, who both played well. In fact, I mentioned a game or two ago that Booker appeared poised for a breakthrough. That doesn’t mean this level of production is something we should expect every night, but it does suggest he’s starting to understand what’s being asked of him and is making a more purposeful effort to execute it. He still has some physical limitations, but as we saw Tuesday, he also brings some real strengths to the table.
Another factor was that Smith didn’t look invincible. I happened to catch Purdue’s earlier loss to Iowa State, and what stood out was how much he struggled against the length of their guards. Even when he got by them, they were able to recover and really bother him. Dent presented a similar matchup problem. Smith is used to being the quickest player on the floor, but that wasn’t the case here. When Smith gained a step, Dent was right there—and even blocked a couple of shots. Add to that the fact that Purdue’s knockdown three-point shooter went just 1-for-6 from beyond the arc.
So the question becomes: is all of this repeatable? I hope so, but I’m not convinced. Dent( as someone else pointed out) has shown flashes like this before, only to regress, which makes me think confidence remains his biggest challenge. Was this the game that finally restores his self-belief? The encouraging part is that the upcoming schedule gives him a real opportunity to build on what he did Tuesday.
Booker gives me more concern, largely because I think he—and the rest of the bigs—benefited from an injury that limited Purdue’s usual interior attack. Even so, if you go back and watch the game, Purdue scored a lot of easy points in the paint early on. I actually thought they did themselves a disservice by not consistently pounding the ball inside. That said, credit to the Bruins—their double teams were excellent on Tuesday.
All of that leads to the larger takeaway: the main concerns are still there. We were outrebounded and badly lost the second-chance points battle, 16–2, which is a real problem. And despite the positives, this game was decided on a razor’s edge—we were essentially one missed three, or one made three, away from a loss.