Loading the game…
⌘K
Purdue beat Rutgers 100–71 at home on Mar 4, 2025.
| Team | 1st | 2nd | Final |
|---|---|---|---|
  RUTG | 41 | 30 | 71 |
  PUR | 50 | 50 | 100 |
Rutgers Scarlet KnightsPurdue Boilermakers| RUTG | MIN | PTS | REB | AST | FG | 3PT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ace Bailey | 31 | 12 | 2 | 0 | 5-13 | 1-6 |
| Dylan Harper | 24 | 13 | 1 | 2 | 5-9 | 3-5 |
| Jeremiah Williams | 22 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 2-4 | 0-0 |
| Lathan Sommerville | 20 | 9 | 3 | 0 | 3-6 | 0-0 |
| Dylan Grant | 19 | 5 | 2 | 0 | 1-3 | 0-1 |
| Tyson Acuff | 22 | 5 | 1 | 3 | 2-5 | 1-3 |
| Zach Martini | 19 | 9 | 5 | 1 | 3-5 | 2-4 |
| Jamichael Davis | 16 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 1-4 | 0-1 |
| P.J. Hayes | 12 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 1-4 | 1-4 |
| Emmanuel Ogbole | 8 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 2-3 | 0-0 |
| Jordan Derkack | 5 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0-1 | 0-1 |
| Bryce Ruglass Dortch | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| Totals | 71 | 21 | 10 | 25-57 | 8-25 |
| PUR | MIN | PTS | REB | AST | FG | 3PT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Braden Smith | 32 | 23 | 5 | 9 | 7-15 | 7-13 |
| Trey Kaufman-Renn | 26 | 16 | 8 | 3 | 8-10 | 0-0 |
| C.J. Cox | 26 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 3-5 | 0-1 |
| Caleb Furst | 26 | 2 | 9 | 2 | 1-3 | 0-0 |
| Fletcher Loyer | 23 | 23 | 2 | 3 | 8-13 | 7-12 |
| Gicarri Harris | 17 | 11 | 3 | 0 | 4-7 | 2-4 |
| Myles Colvin | 15 | 9 | 2 | 0 | 2-8 | 2-6 |
| Camden Heide | 10 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| Raleigh Burgess | 7 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
| Will Berg | 5 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
| Brian Waddell | 4 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 2-3 | 0-0 |
| Sam King | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| Josh Furst | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| Jace Rayl | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| Jack Lusk | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| Totals | 100 | 38 | 19 | 37-66 | 18-36 |
Starters first, then by minutes. +/- is the team's point margin while he was on the floor.
This game's box score totals; green marks the better side (fewer turnovers and fouls are better).
RUTG offense ranks better in 4 of 4 matchups · PUR defense in 0
PUR offense ranks better in 3 of 4 matchups (3 by a clear margin) · RUTG defense in 1
Season box-score numbers; ranks of 360 teams. A defense ranks well for allowing less and forcing more turnovers.
RUTGPURExpected pace: about 68 possessions a team (the two teams' average). Rank among 360 teams, 1st = best.
RUTGPURNo lines posted yet: research the rotation against any number
Trey Kaufman-Renn's full breakdown holds the game-by-game chart, hit-rate splits and filters, the what-if line and market curve, every book and the line history, closing lines, the projected range, teammates and matchup tools. Checking your player views…
Checking your player views…| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ace Bailey | 33.0 | 16.9 | 7.0 | 1.7 |
| Dylan Harper | 30.1 | 15.8 | 3.8 | 3.3 |
| Jeremiah Williams | 22.2 | 6.5 | 2.6 | 1.7 |
| Lathan Sommerville | 22.1 | 7.9 | 4.2 | 0.6 |
| Dylan Grant | 20.3 | 6.7 | 3.9 | 0.2 |
| Jamichael Davis | 19.0 | 6.0 | 1.9 | 1.7 |
| Zach Martini | 16.9 | 4.1 | 1.9 | 0.6 |
| Tyson Acuff | 16.7 | 6.7 | 1.7 | 1.2 |
| Player | Min | Pts | Reb | Ast |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Braden Smith | 37.3 | 17.1 | 4.3 | 8.6 |
| Fletcher Loyer | 30.9 | 13.3 | 2.6 | 1.3 |
| Trey Kaufman-Renn | 30.2 | 20.8 | 5.7 | 2.4 |
| Caleb Furst | 23.8 | 4.9 | 4.4 | 0.5 |
| C.J. Cox | 22.0 | 7.5 | 3.8 | 0.6 |
| Camden Heide | 17.6 | 3.2 | 2.9 | 0.5 |
| Gicarri Harris | 14.7 | 3.7 | 1.5 | 0.7 |
| Myles Colvin | 14.2 | 4.3 | 1.8 | 0.2 |
RUTG offenseper gamePUR defenseRank among 360 teams, 1st = best; a longer bar is a better rank. A defense ranks well for allowing less: lower shooting percentages, fewer points and rebounds, more turnovers forced.
RUTGForAgainst44% of RUTG's points come in the first half, 47% for the average team.
PURForAgainst49% of PUR's points come in the first half, 47% for the average team.
Average points per game in each period, from box scores, over a team's last 17 games; overtime is pooled into the second half and the game. History, not a forecast: a team that leads late plays differently than one that trails, and a small window swings.
RUTG 3series7 PUR| Date | Road | Home | Winner | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 2, 2025 | PUR 81 | RUTG 65 | PUR+16 | +16 |
| Mar 4, 2025 | RUTG 71 | PUR 100 | PUR+29 | +29 |
| Jan 9, 2025 | PUR 68 | RUTG 50 | PUR+18 | +18 |
| Date | Road | Home | Winner | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 22, 2024 | RUTG 68 | PUR 96 | PUR+28 | +28 |
| Jan 28, 2024 | PUR 68 | RUTG 60 | PUR+8 | +8 |
| Date | Road | Home | Winner | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 10, 2023 | RUTG 65 | PUR 70 | PUR+5 | +5 |
| Jan 2, 2023 | RUTG 65 | PUR 64 | RUTG+1 | +1 |
| Date | Road | Home | Winner | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2022 | RUTG 72 | PUR 84 | PUR+12 | +12 |
| Date | Road | Home | Winner | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 9, 2021 | PUR 68 | RUTG 70 | RUTG+2 | +2 |
| Date | Road | Home | Winner | Margin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 29, 2020 | PUR 76 | RUTG 81 | RUTG+5 | +5 |
From box scores. Ratings are per 100 possessions (possessions estimated from box scores). Prop lines from DraftKings, FanDuel, BetMGM and Caesars; hit rates are past games against a number, not a forecast or a pick. For information only, not betting advice. 21+ only. Gambling problem? Call or text 1-800-GAMBLER.
