2010 College Hoops Previews: The Big 12

Here's the second installment of the mammoth 2010 College Hoops Previews series. Once again I'm joined by JP and ML, and this time Randy from RTC contributed as well. For more details on what's going on with the ratings, go here and here; the regression ratings for the Big 12 are here. All team ratings from kenpom.com, recruiting info was taken from Scout.

1. Kansas
2009 rating: .951
Returning 97% of minutes, 98% of points
Lost Quintrell Thomas & Tyrone Appleton (transfers).
Incoming freshmen: Xavier Henry (6'6, 210; 5*), Thomas Robinson (6'8, 218; 5*), Elijah Johnson (6'2, 180; 4*)
Initial ratings: ML .980, VW .970, JP .981, RM .990

VW: The Jayhawks return 98% of scoring from Pomeroy's #10 team in '09, which lost to the eventual national runner up in the Sweet 16. Aldrich is the early NPOY frontrunner, Collins returns for his senior year, and Taylor looks to improve on his freshman year 104.5 ORtg. Oh, and let's not forget about the top five recruiting class, headlined by Xavier Henry.

It's easy to figure out their ranking compared to the rest of the country (1), but a bit more difficult to give them a specific rating. I'm certainly not comfortable with 0.990 -- in the last four years, only one team has finished that high ('08 Kansas). That'd be like projecting an NFL team to win 15 games. How did you guys arrive at your ratings for them?

RM: Good point about the year-over-year comparison, but looking at their schedule, I see no more than 3-4 losses from this team so I'm not sure where that would place them statistically but wouldn't it be near the 2008 group of KU, UNC and UCLA?

JP: Of course, it would depend how they play on their way to a 30+ win campaign, since wins don’t mean anything in KenPom. This team should be great this year, but comparing them to ’08 Kansas would just be disrespectful. They should improve on that defensive FT%, though.

ML: They aren't better than '08 Kansas. '08 Kansas is and always will be the best college basketball team in the history of the solar system.

If Henry is worth at least a portion of the fuss then they should at the very least end up somewhere between what VW & I have. I guess I should probably start doing this for every team, but last year's rating was hurt by not having Little the whole season and by some bad free throw luck. Maybe Aldrich should stick his arms out further into the lane during opposing FTs.

Final rating: .977

2. Texas
2009 rating: .913
Returning 71% of minutes, 70% of points
Lost A.J. Abrams, Conor Atchley (seniors), Harrison Smith (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Jordan Hamilton (6'7, 210; 5*), Avery Bradley (6'2, 165; 5*), Shawn Williams (6'6, 185; 4*)
Initial ratings: ML .920, VW .935, JP .925, RM .915

VW: I'm not at all suprised that I came up with the most optimistic rating for the Horns; I really like these guys. Pittman has gone from playing 11% of possible minutes in his freshman year to 16% in '08 and 41% last season. The quality of his game has also improved along with the quantity; he shot 62% from the field last year (they were all twos, sadly), while being the fourth most efficient offensive rebounder in the country (I suppose this is not a coincidence). Who knows how Hamilton and Bradley will turn out, but there is some serious potential here if the freshmen live up to the hype.

ML: Abrams essentially took 1/4 of their shots last year. He's pretty much irreplacable. That fact, and Pittman's conditioning are the only things that worry me about this squad. They're good.

RM: The Horns are getting love for their stellar recruiting class, but I'm not as sold on what's returning. Pittman has improved, but I'm not sure he's going to completely figure it out. I do like James though.

Final rating: .928

3. Oklahoma
2009 rating: .947
Returning 44% of minutes, 42% of points
Lost Blake & Taylor Griffin (draft), Austin Johnson & Omar Leary (seniors), Juan Patillo (dismissed)
Incoming freshmen: Keith "Tiny" Gallon (6'8, 300; 5*), Andrew Fitzgerald (6'8, 240; 4*), Tommy Mason-Griffin (5'11, 195; 4*), Steven Pledger (6'4, 190; 4*), Kyle Hardrick (6'9, 230; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .885, VW .880, JP .860, RM .890

VW: Will the Sooners be able to recover from the devastating, program-turning loss of Austin Johnson? I doubt it. They caught a break when Warren came back; that decision will likely keep them in the top third of the conference this year. It's certainly a good year to have a strong recruiting class (Tiny!), as they have some big shoes to fill, even beyond AJ.

JP: I may have not put enough stock into their recruiting class; I like this Tiny kid a little too much to fairly rate his potential contributions, and thus negatively overcompensated. That being said, they still must fill 60% of last year’s minutes with players (minus Warren and Crocker) who have very little game experience. There wasn’t too much homework that went into my low rating, I just think there is more to the loss of Griffin A & B and more importantly Austin Johnson than the regression was accounting for.

RM: The D will remain solid (Pomeroy #17, #32, #36 from 07-09), but what caused OU to win 30 games last season was their vastly improved offense. Griffin the Younger had much to do with that, but Warren had the fifth most efficient rookie season among guards last year - he'll be a terror for opposing defenses to stop in 09-10.

Final rating: .878

4. Oklahoma St.
2009 rating: .901
Returning 57% of minutes, 58% of points
Lost Byron Eaton, Terrel Harris and Anthony Brown (seniors), Ibrahima Thomas & Malcoln Kirkland (transfers)
Incoming freshmen: Karron Johnson (6'8, 205; 4*), Roger Franklin (6'5, 195; 4*), Ray Penn (5'9, 160; 4*), Torin Walker (6'10, 225; 3*), Fred Gulley (6'2, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .880, VW .875, JP .875, RM .885

VW: James Anderson made a big leap last year, dramatically improving his shooting percentages across the board while continuing to be a big part of the offense. It'll be interesting to see if he can keep that up without Eaton at the point; I'm not sure that the 5'10, 165 Keiton Page is going to be able to fill Eaton's shoes. They have a decent amount coming back (also Muonelo and Moses), and a solid incoming class, I just don't know who's going to play the point.

Final rating: .877

5. Kansas St.
2009 rating: .863
Returning 65% of minutes, 66% of points
Lost Darren Kent (senior), Fred Brown, Ron Anderson and Buchi Awaji (transfers)
Incoming freshmen: Wally Judge (6'8, 215; 5*), Rodney McGruder (6'4, 175; 3*), Nick Russell (6'4, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .870, VW .870, JP .867, RM .875

VW: No superstars here (although Clemente is pretty good), but K-State does return a lot of depth: five guys who played decent minutes last year and posted above-average ORtgs. They'll miss the rebounding of Kent and Anderson -- those two played a big part in them having the #1 offensive rebounding team in the country in '09 -- but that may not be much of an issue if Judge (an "intriguing forward who can own the boards") lives up to his billing.

Final rating: .870

6. Missouri
2009 rating: .961
Returning 63% of minutes, 51% of points
Lost Leo Lyons, Matt Lawrence & Michael Anderson Jr. (seniors), DeMarre Carroll (draft)
Incoming freshmen: Keith Dewitt (6'9, 210; 3*), Michael Dixon (6'1, 155; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .880, VW .855, JP .850, RM .885

VW: Since the Tigers were unusually good last year, jumping from .890 in '08 to .961 in in '09, and are losing three key guys, I didn't think their 2009 rating was a very good baseline to use. A team headlined by J.T. Tiller and Zaire Taylor is simply going to be a lot worse than one with Lyons, Carroll, and Lawrence.

RM: Slight disagreement on Mizzou. I expect they'll drop a notch, but Anderson is a system coach with his fullcourt style and interchangeable bodies. Once he gets his players there, each year's team looks largely the same as the last. Carroll and Lyons were no joke, but I expect by the end of the season they'll be formidable again.

JP: I’m not sure I understand the discrepancy amongst us here. The losses of Carroll and Lyons are huge, regardless of whatever system the backups are stepping into. Dewitt & Dixon are marginal recruits at best, yet are going to be forced to log some decent minutes. The Tigers will undoubtedly progress as the players gain experience, but when you take away your three highest scoring players, and replace them with players that fail to score in double digits despite receiving the minutes to do so, you are going to have some problems.

Final rating: .866

7. Texas A&M
2009 rating: .861
Returning 72% of minutes, 66% of points
Lost Josh Carter (senior), Chinemelu Elonu (draft), Denzel Bowles (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Naji Hibbert (6'5, 180; 4*), Khris Middlton (6'6, 195; 3*), Kourtney Robinson (6'8, 205; 3*), Ray Turner (6'8, 210; 3*), Jeremy Adams (6'4, 195; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .855, VW .860, JP .875, RM .870

VW: I spent a couple minutes staring at their regression rating trying to figure out why they were so low; I eventually realized that Elonu (barely) got drafted. They still return a decent core, with Sloan and Davis coming back for their senior years, although it's becoming apparent that Roland just isn't very good.

RM: Hanging on to Sloan & Davis was key for Mark Turgeon in terms of experience, although Sloan is about as efficient as employer-based health care coverage. Still, they return a good amount from a 24-10 second-round team, and their recruits are solid if not spectacular.

Final rating: .865

8. Baylor
2009 rating: .884
Returning 47% of minutes, 47% of points
Lost Curtis Jerrels, Kevin Rogers, Henry Dugat, Mamadou Diene, Delbert Simpson
Incoming freshmen: Nolan Dennis (6'5, 180; 4*), Mark McLaughlin (6'4, 175; 3*), Givon Crump (6'7, 205; 3*), A.J. Walton (6'0, 175; 3*), Cory Jefferson (6'9, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .840, VW .825, JP .823, RM .815

VW: ML is the highest of the four of us on the Bears. There's a shocker. Sadly, I think we've seen their peak, and I doubt this is a terribily controversial opinion. Despite losing three starters they actually retain their two most efficient scorers (and two coolest names) in LaceDarius and Tweety. It'll be tough to replace those minutes though, particularly Jerrells' production at the point and Rogers' rebounding.

ML: I think Quincy Acy has Rogers covered and then some. Unfortunately the front court gets super suspect after him, and I'm not sure I properly accounted for this fact. It'll be interesting to see if they improve at all on defense now that they won't have 3 relative midgets on the floor a majority of the time. Height is overrated, but it is tough to match-up when you give 3 guys under 6'2" starters minutes.

Final rating: .825

9. Texas Tech
2009 rating: .725
Returning 66% of minutes, 71% of points
Lost Rogdrick Craig, Damir Suljagic, Alan Voskuil, Michael Prince (seniors), Tyree Graham (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Brad Reese (6'7, 195; 3*), Theron Jenkins (6'6, 211; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .760, VW .770, JP .772, RM .755

VW: Losing Voskuil hurts a lot, since his lights out 3P shooting was one of the few things their offense had going for it. TTU has been horrific on the offensive boards each of the last four seasons, so that figures to continue. Forcing turnovers looks to be another problem area; they were 316th in TO% in '09, and lose their top two Steal%s in Prince and Voskuil.

Final rating: .765

10. Nebraska
2009 rating: .810
Returning 44% of minutes, 41% of points
Lost Ade Dagunduro, Steve Harley & Paul Velander (seniors), Cookie Miller & Alonzo Edwards (transfers)
Incoming freshmen: Adrien Coleman (6'4, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .770, VW .770, JP .725, RM .780

JP: They couldn’t rebound last year, and I don’t see any way they don’t perform worse in that area this year. They were DEAD LAST in Div. I last year in effective height, and minus the departure of little Cookie Miller (5’7”), who transferred to Miami (OH), this team isn’t getting any taller. If they can somehow prove to me that they are going to score some points, and maybe get a rebound or two, I’d feel more comfortable rating them up towards you guys.

Final rating: .760

11. Iowa St.
2009 rating: .650
Returning 64% of minutes, 78% of points
Lost Bryan Petersen, Alex Thompson & Sean Haluska (seniors), Wes Eikmeier (quit)
Incoming freshmen: Chris Colvin (6'3, 175; 4*), Marquis Gilstrap (Juco; 6'6, 210; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .730, VW .760, JP .772, RM .770

RM: Should we just go ahead and call Craig Brackins the next Ike Diogu and be done with it?

VW: That's an excellent comparison. Is this the year that Brackins turns the corner? Despite ending up with a pedestrian 99.4 ORtg in '09, he's still projected to go in the late lottery of the '10 draft -- it's true that he was a monster on the boards last year, 13th in the nation in DR%. It wouldn't hurt if he cut down on the threes: 42/149 in his two years, a pathetic 28%. They did lose a decent number of minutes, but nobody that was a big part of the offense, which obviously shows up in the discrepancy between RetMin% and RetPts%.

ML: Small sample size, but I think Brackins should stick to trying and rebound Vander Beke's occasional misses. Do that and he could end up going as high in the draft as DeJuan Blair!!!

JP: How does a team pull off being in the top 12 rebounding defensively, and bottom five offensively? Considering there was a decent discrepancy in each of Greg McDermott’s three years at ISU, you have to look to the offensive scheme. Oh, it’s the 3-pointers. ISU has some size, and some horrible long range shooters, so if McDermott grows some competence I think this team should improve solely based on changing execution styles. Considering that has a .0254% chance of happening, I think .755 is fairly accurate.

Final rating: .755

12. Colorado
2009 rating: .486
Returning 88% of minutes, 90% of points
Lost Jermyl Jackson-Wilson (senior), Toby Veal (transfer)
Incoming freshmen: Alec Burks (6'4, 180; 3*)
Initial ratings: ML .640, VW .705, JP .700, RM .705

VW: This is a tough one, I'm surprised the three of us are as close as we are. While not Indiana-bad last year, they were reasonably close, finishing as the fourth worst major conference team in the Pomeroy ratings (also behind DePaul and Georgia). They don't have much of a recruiting class, so it then becomes a question of two things -- how much do they regress to the mean, and how much does the 90% of returning scoring improve?

ML: Maybe it is because I don't even know what a regression is anymore, but I had no problem straying from the computation on this one. The Buffs don't rebound, and they don't defend. At all. I realize that at least one of these guys is bound to improve, but will they really get that much better in these trouble areas? I don't think so. Bring back 89% of your garbage, and you've still got a lot of garbage. I'm so profound.

RM: They have to improve (right?), and I expect that they will. But that only means winning 4-5 conference games rather than one. They're still ridiculously far from the top half of this conference.

Final rating: .688

VW: We actually have the Big 12 improving a bit overall, from last year's .829 average rating to .838 in 2010. That's a bit misleading though, since Colorado really weighed the conference's 2009 rating down; in 2008, when the Buffaloes were at least respectable and the Big 12 was the best conference in the nation, they came in at an average of .883. That's almost certainly unrealistic though, as the conference was absolutely stacked with talent two years ago, and that doesn't look to be the case in '10.

To recap, here are all the ratings in a slightly more condensed format:

After obvious gaps between the top three spots, the middle of the conference is very muddled, with the next five teams being nearly indistinguishable. If our ratings hold true (they won't), seeing how many tournament teams emerge from this group will be very interesting.

Next up: The Big Ten, hopefully a week from Monday.