Teams › Big Ten · Compare Purdue with another team
Purdue
Purdue returns 70% of last season's minutes and rates #31 on offense and #73 on defense of 365 teams. 80% range: +6.4 to +20.8.
Why we have them here
Purdue's preseason projection of +13.6 (No. 38 of 365) starts from the roster: its players' ratings, weighted by projected minutes, add up to a roll-up worth +5.1, less than the +8.8 typical of teams ranked near it. Last season's rating (No. 9 at the end of 2025-26) adds +4.7, more than its neighbours' +2.5; the program's level two and three seasons back and the roster's experience and shape add +3.1. A stretch at the top of the scale adds +0.5, because a straight-line calibration shrinks elite teams. It returns 70% of last season's minutes, more than teams ranked near it (33%). The projection leans most on C.J. Cox (+3.6), Jack Benter (+2.5) and Daniel Jacobsen (+1.4); the newcomer who matters most is Luke Ertel, a freshman, recruit No. 40, at +0.8. Its 80% range, +6.4 to +20.8, is about as wide as that of teams ranked near it.
Generated from the published projection's own terms, not written by hand. "Teams ranked near it" are the thirty nearest in the preseason order. Preseason projection frozen 2026-10-23; how the projection is built.
Roster
Returning 62% · Freshman 25% · Other newcomer 13%
| Rank | Player | Pos | Ht | D1 yrs | Group | From | MPG | Rating | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 162 | C.J. Cox | G | 6-3 | 2 | Returning | Purdue | 26 | +5.5 | +3.6 |
| 305 | Jack Benter | G | 6-6 | 1 | Returning | Purdue | 22 | +4.6 | +2.5 |
| 600 | Daniel Jacobsen | C | 7-4 | 2 | Returning | Purdue | 19 | +3.1 | +1.4 |
| 923 | Luke Ertel | G | 6-1 | 0 | Freshman | High school | 18 | +1.8 | +0.8 |
| 1016 | Omer Mayer | G | 6-4 | 1 | Returning | Purdue | 19 | +1.4 | +0.7 |
| 1125 | Gicarri Harris | G | 6-3 | 2 | Returning | Purdue | 19 | +1.0 | +0.5 |
| 1203 | Jacob Webber | F | 6-6 | 0 | Freshman | High school | 13 | +1.0 | +0.3 |
| 1363 | Sinan Huan | C | 7-0 | 0 | Freshman | High school | 8 | +0.7 | +0.1 |
| 1492 | Jack Lusk | G | 6-4 | 2 | Returning | Purdue | 10 | +0.3 | +0.1 |
| 1537 | Antione West Jr | F | 6-3 | 0 | Other newcomer | 5 | +0.3 | +0.0 | |
| 1577 | Caden Pierce | F | 1 | Other newcomer | 5 | +0.2 | +0.0 | ||
| 1677 | Enzo Shahrvin | F | 6-9 | 0 | Other newcomer | 5 | -0.1 | +0.0 | |
| 1677 | Sam King | F | 6-9 | 4 | Other newcomer | 5 | -0.1 | +0.0 | |
| 1737 | Raleigh Burgess | F | 6-11 | 2 | Other newcomer | 5 | -0.2 | +0.0 | |
| 1819 | Jace Rayl | G | 5-11 | 3 | Returning | Purdue | 9 | -0.3 | -0.1 |
| 2862 | Rivers Knight | F | 6-8 | 0 | Freshman | High school | 12 | -1.2 | -0.4 |
A player's rating is points per 100 possessions better than an average Division I player while he is on the floor. Contribution weights it by the share of a rotation slot he is projected to play, so a star on the bench and a role player who never sits both read right. Rank is among all 5,249 rated players. MPG is the projected share of a rotation slot times 40. "From" is last season's team. The bars are contribution, the player's rating times his projected share; their sum is the roll-up the projection starts from.
Schedule
| Date | Opponent | Proj. margin | Win prob. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon Nov 02 | N |  Gonzaga #14 | -4.3 | 36% | |
| Fri Nov 06 | vs |  Valparaiso #172 | +15.1 | 89% | |
| Mon Nov 09 | vs |  Illinois State #108 | +12.2 | 84% | |
| Fri Nov 13 | vs |  Ohio #232 | +17.6 | 92% | |
| Tue Nov 17 | vs |  Lipscomb #118 | +13.4 | 86% | |
| Fri Nov 20 | vs |  Oakland #159 | +15.2 | 89% | |
| Tue Nov 24 | N |  DePaul #97 | +4.9 | 66% | |
| Thu Nov 26 | N |  Oklahoma #30 | -1.0 | 47% | |
| Tue Dec 01 | vs |  Iowa #33 | conf | +2.3 | 58% |
| Sat Dec 05 | at |  Iowa State #9 | -12.1 | 16% | |
| Tue Dec 08 | at |  Wisconsin #34 | conf | -4.0 | 37% |
| Fri Dec 11 | vs |  Tennessee #13 | +1.6 | 55% | |
| Sat Dec 19 | N |  Colorado #85 | +4.0 | 63% | |
| Mon Dec 21 | vs |  California Baptist #157 | +14.5 | 88% | |
| Wed Dec 30 | vs |  USC #35 | conf | +2.9 | 59% |
| Sat Jan 02 | vs |  Rutgers #102 | conf | +8.8 | 76% |
| Tue Jan 05 | at |  Illinois #5 | conf | -9.4 | 22% |
| Fri Jan 08 | at |  Michigan #11 | conf | -7.9 | 26% |
| Tue Jan 12 | vs |  Ohio State #27 | conf | +1.6 | 55% |
| Sun Jan 17 | at |  Minnesota #65 | conf | -0.7 | 48% |
| Wed Jan 20 | at |  Penn State #89 | conf | +1.0 | 53% |
| Sat Jan 23 | vs |  Maryland #64 | conf | +5.6 | 68% |
| Tue Jan 26 | vs |  Nebraska #12 | conf | -1.5 | 45% |
| Sat Jan 30 | at |  Michigan State #6 | conf | -9.2 | 23% |
| Wed Feb 03 | at | Rutgers #102 | conf | +3.0 | 60% |
| Sat Feb 06 | vs |  Northwestern #79 | conf | +6.7 | 71% |
| Fri Feb 12 | vs | Illinois #5 | conf | -3.1 | 40% |
| Tue Feb 16 | at |  Indiana #55 | conf | -2.2 | 43% |
| Sun Feb 21 | vs |  UCLA #28 | conf | +1.8 | 56% |
| Wed Feb 24 | at |  Oregon #58 | conf | -0.7 | 48% |
| Sat Feb 27 | at |  Washington #92 | conf | +2.2 | 57% |
| Fri Mar 05 | vs | Indiana #55 | conf | +4.6 | 65% |
Projected margin is from Purdue's side, with home court where the game is not neutral (N). Games are the schedule as posted; tournaments and late additions appear as they are listed. Predictions are as of 2026-10-26 and reflect the roster as the model has it on that date.