Welcome to the third edition of the Big 12 Power Rankings here at The Big 12 Basketblog. If you haven’t read either of my first two Power Rankings posts, or the season previews I did on each Big 12 teams, you can find any of those posts at this link. Because this blog is still fairly new, I’m going to include what I’ve essentially termed my mission statement for this weekly article yet again. The two paragraphs below were the intro for my first Power Rankings post, and I’ll keep including this for a bit. So if you’ve been here before, just go ahead and skip past the below inset.

“Two of my favorite basketball writers on the Internet are Zach Lowe and Luke Winn. I guess I should say “were” for one of those guys as Luke Winn was hired by the Toronto Raptors (!) in the summer of 2017 as Director of Prospect Strategy. Lowe covers the NBA and Winn did cover college basketball for Sports Illustrated. The best part about reading these guys is that you learn something new about basketball, whether it’s a team or a player, every time that you read their stuff. They inform you in intelligent ways without relying on the standard hot take-isms or journalistic tropes. They notice things about teams or players while watching games and then show it to their readers, whether through game clips or data-based analysis, and they do it in a way that is digestible and thought-provoking. I do not have the talent that these two guys have, but my goal is to provide you with a similar look at the Big 12 every week with my weekly Big 12 Power Rankings post. I will rank the teams 1 through 10, but that’s not really what matters here (but feel free to let me know if your team should obviously be ranked 5th instead of 6th). What I want to provide are statistics, analysis, game clips, or just random observations that I’ve made that help you to learn more about a team or a player on that team. And sometimes, I just might include a funny anecdote or item about a team if there’s a slow week. Some weeks, I’ll write more about some teams than other teams. The bigger the game or a week a school has, the more likely I am to go a little deeper on them. Everyone will get their fair share in the end. Just like Lowe and Winn, I want to inform you and give you thought-provoking and compelling analysis on the Big 12 that you’re not getting anywhere else on the Internet. Alright, let’s jump in.”

As per usual, here’s a breakdown on the key Kenpom statistics and metrics that will be shown for each team every week. These will always be shown right below the header for each team. Ken Pomeroy’s blog post explaining these metrics can be read here.

• Ranking and AdjEM: The ranking signifies where a team ranks nationally in Kenpom’s AdjEM. AdjEM is Adjusted Efficiency Margin; it is the difference between a team’s offensive and defensive efficiency. The margin is “adjusted” to account for strength of competition, expected outcome, and recency. The idea of “adjusted” is explained in much clearer detail by Pomeroy here.

• Adj. Offense: Also known as Adjusted Offensive Efficiency. Adj. Offense is shown on a per 100 possessions basis, so a rating of 112.3 would represent 112.3 points scored per 100 possessions. This will include the team’s adjusted efficiency number, their rank nationally, and their rank in the Big 12.

• Adj. Defense: Also known as Adjusted Defensive Efficiency. This works the same as Adj. Offense, but is for a team’s defensive efficiency. Adj. Defense is shown on a per 100 possessions basis, so a rating of 98.7 would represent 98.7 points allowed per 100 possessions. This will include the team’s adjusted efficiency number, their rank nationally, and their rank in the Big 12.

• Adj. Tempo: This shows the number of possessions per 40 minutes. A data point of 71.8 would mean this team plays 71.8 possessions per 40 minutes. This will always include the team’s adjusted tempo, their rank nationally, and their rank in the Big 12.

All statistics used in this post are from Kenpom, Synergy Sports, College Basketball Reference, Hoop-Math, or T-Rank.

1. Kansas Jayhawks (Last Week: 1st)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 6-0, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 1st, +28.24

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 117.7, 5th, 1st

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 89.5, 5th, 1st

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 72.3, 70th, 3rd



Last week, I talked about Kansas’ offensive efficiency thus far, and how 3-point shooting has fueled it. That engine isn’t running out of gas. Kansas recorded PPP of 1.24 and 1.32 in their two blowout victories in the past week over Oakland and Toledo. They had a PPP of 1.69 in the first half against Toledo. That’s absolutely ludicrous. They went only went 6-16 from 3-point range against Oakland, but followed it up with a 12-20 performance versus Toledo.

Who has been their best three-point shooter thus far? That would be Svi Mykhailiuk. Svi currently cannot miss as he’s shooting 22-39 from 3, a 56% mark. His Offensive Rating is 134.8, which is somehow the 2nd best rating on the team, behind Lagerald Vick’s 137.7. (Marcus Garrett also has a rating in the 130s, at 130 even; this team is so, so good on offense right now). It’s very unlikely Svi will shoot over 50% on threes all season long, but he did shoot 38% as a sophomore and 40% as a junior. It’s not like he’s going to nosedive into the mid-30s. He’s going to be a 43-47% 3-point shooter, especially if he NEVER MISSES A CORNER 3. Seriously, check out his shot chart for the 2018 season.

Svi is 10/10 on corner 3’s so far this season. He literally has not missed through six games! It’s clearly his favorite spot on the court. Last year, he shot 21-45 on corner 3’s, a 47% mark. Here’s his shot chart from the 2017 season.

When you compare his shot chart from last season to this season, they actually look remarkably similar. You could argue he’s leaving points on the floor currently with his low percentage of 43% in the restricted area; that number will improve. At this point in time, I feel comfortable saying this perimeter shot distribution and success is a trend, not an outlier. Svi definitely has his spots that he likes, and opponents better not let him find looks in those areas.

(He’ll miss a corner 3 at some point. I think.)

Coming Up: 12/2 vs. Syracuse in Miami, 12/6 vs. Washington in Kansas City

2. West Virginia Mountaineers (Last Week: 3rd)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 6-1, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 14th, +21.94

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 113.6, 23rd, 2nd

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 91.7, 12th, 4th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 74.5, 25th, 2nd



West Virginia’s offense is currently 2nd in the Big 12, according to Kenpom’s Adjusted Offense metric. That ranking may surprise some people, but they do a good job creating looks for Jevon Carter and creating looks for others based on Carter’s presence on the court. (They also do an incredible job at grabbing offensive rebounds and getting to the FT line.)

In the Advocare Invitational final vs. Missouri, Jevon Carter started the game by hitting three 3-pointers immediately, as the Mountaineers jumped out to a 9-4 lead. Missouri amped up their defensive awareness and pressure on Carter. Bob Huggins countered with a terrific, simple little set.

This season, 22.9% of Carter’s play types have been as a spot-up shooter and 10.2% have been coming off screens, per Synergy Sports. Opponents know West Virginia will try to get him open perimeter looks. That’s why this is such a great set, because it uses Missouri’s focus on Carter to West Virginia’s advantage. Using a shooter as a screener can be so effective, and that’s what Huggins drew up here. Carter initiates the set and makes his way to the restricted area below the hoop. That’s a typical starting point for a good shooter to run off a screen. Instead, Carter doesn’t run off a screen; he sets a back pick near the left wing which leads to an easy lob pass lay-in at the rim. Beautifully done.

Carter currently has a usage rate of 24% (2nd on the team behind Daxter Miles) and is taking 24.4% of shots when he is on the court. This will continue until Esa Ahmad is back in the rotation. He is the fulcrum of the offense, and opponents know that. Expect to continue to see occasional sets like this in the halfcourt to catch the defense off guard.

Coming Up: 11/30 vs. NJIT, 12/5 vs. Virginia

3. Baylor Bears (Last Week: 2nd)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 5-1, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 22nd, +19.13

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 112.7, 31st, 4th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 93.6, 23rd, 6th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 65.7, 340th, 10th

I mentioned in my Let’s Gamble! post on Wednesday that there are two things that currently worry me about Baylor’s offense — offensive rebounding and perimeter shooting. Let’s dive into both of those in greater detail.

Let’s talk about offensive rebounding first. Currently, Baylor is rebounding 35.5% of their own misses, which is 40th in the nation. That’s good, right? A lot of teams would dream of having that number. But it is much lower than in years past. Take a look at this chart.

In the last four years, their OffReb% has been 40.1%, 42.1%, 40.1%, and 39.8% (from 2014 to 2017). So while their offensive rebounding still looks very good when you compare it to other teams, they are not rebounding at the same level as this program has in recent years. If they don’t start rebounding better on the offensive end, they might need to start playing with more pace to generate more possessions or find ways to get to the FT line more often. Guys like Johnathan Motley or Rico Gathers aren’t walking back through that door. And with Terry Maston injured and out until January, this number could potentially continue to slide. Maston currently is the top offensive rebounder on the roster, at 13.5%.

The second troubling thing currently is Baylor’s perimeter shooting. Outside of Manu Lecomte, not enough guys are taking and making threes. Last season, Baylor made 6.5 3-pointers/game per 18.3 3-pointers attempted. This season, that number has barely changed. They are making 6.5 3-pointers/game per 17.5 3-pointers attempted. So what’s the issue? Last season, Manu Lecomte only attempted 5.3 threes per game. This season, he’s attempting 7.5 threes per game. That’s putting too much of your perimeter eggs into one basket. See the below chart for visual proof.

Lecomte can’t be that much of an outlier on the horizontal x-axis. Someone needs to scoot over to the right a little bit and join him on that side of the chart. Otherwise the opponents defensive perimeter focus will be all on him. Lecomte shot 41% from 3-point range last season and is currently shooting 42% this season. It’s not affecting him yet, but it could at some point. It can’t all be on him. King McClure should have more than 18 attempts. Nuni Omot is 1-9 from 3 in his last 4 games. Those two need to help lighten the load on Lecomte.

Coming Up: 12/2 vs. Wichita State, 12/4 vs. Sam Houston State

4. TCU Horned Frogs (Last Week: 4th)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 7-0, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 25th, +18.59

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 113.6, 25th, 3rd

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 95.0, 31st, 7th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 71.3, 109th, 4th



In my first Power Rankings post, I took a look at TCU’s offensive rebounding through three games and was curious about the drop in offensive rebounds by Vladimir Brodziansky and Kenrich Williams. TCU’s average PPP in those three games was lower than I anticipated in the preseason. Here’s what I wrote:

Kenrich Williams and Vladimir Brodziansky have not grabbed many offensive rebounds this first week. As a team, they are only grabbing 26.4% of available rebounds on offense, down from 34.1% in the 2016-17 season. Look at Williams and Brodziansky thus far compared to 2017. That’s a noticeable dip, especially for Brodziansky. Once again, it’s only three games, and the Horned Frogs are 3-0. There’s nothing to be overly, or even mildly, concerned about. Just something to monitor with these two guys moving forward.

After averaging 1.14 PPP in their first three games, TCU has averaged 1.16 PPP in their latest four contests. The offense is still in that same range. Let’s check back in on these two guys.

Kenrich Williams has returned to his normal role of “grabber of every, single GD rebound”. The dude is so freaking good on the glass. Brodziansky still isn’t grabbing TCU misses like he did last year; he’s rebounding at half the rate of last season. As a team, they’re rebounding 32.4% of their own misses, down from 34.1% last season. Brodziansky still needs to do better here.

The good thing? JD Miller is picking up some of the slack. Last season, JD Miller only rebounded 4.9% of TCU misses when he was on the court. This season, that number is up to 9.1%. So where Brodziansky has fallen off, Miller’s production has grown. It’s worth monitoring the rebounding of these three guys moving forward. Jamie Dixon teams rely on being good offensive rebounding teams; it’s one of the primary reasons his teams are so good on offense year after year (see this table showing his teams since 2004). If they don’t rebound as well, the offense will suffer.

Real quick, here’s an update on Kenrich Williams. If you read my TCU preview, you know Williams is one of my favorite players in the Big 12. He’s averaging 12.4 points, 10.1 rebounds, and 3.9 assists. Williams has played great thus far and is recording double-doubles night after night. He has 4 double-doubles through 7 games, which is 1st in the Big 12. Williams also has a Steal Rate of 4.7%, which ranks 45th out of all players nationally. He does everything for TCU, but I wish he’d be a little more selfish on offense. He’s currently 7th on the team in Usage Rate, at 19.6%. If that number increased, I’m guessing TCU’s PPP would increase as well.

Coming Up: 12/2 vs. Yale, 12/5 vs. SMU

5. Texas Tech Red Raiders (Last Week: 5th)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 6-0, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 16th, +21.34

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 112.4, 35th, 5th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 91.1, 8th, 3rd

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 68.8, 259th, 8th



Texas Tech has only played one game since last week’s Power Rankings post, and it was a 103-69 win against lowly Savannah State (ranked 331st out of 351 teams in Kenpom). So not much has changed since a week ago.

One pleasant surprise out of Texas Tech this season is the play of their freshmen. I did not expect a ton out of these guys, mostly because of their recruiting rankings. Freshmen Davide Moretti, Zhaire Smith, and Jarrett Culver were ranked 95th, 195th, and 313th respectively in 247Sports 2017 recruiting rankings. Culver has been the real surprise for me.

Culver is 2nd on the team in scoring at 11 PPG. He’s made the most threes on their team, shooting 36% on 10-28 shooting from 3. He’s also 15-23 (65%) on two-point FG attempts thus far. His Assist Rate is 20% while his TO Rate is only 11.7%. His overall Offensive Rating is 118.0, which ranks inside the top-500 nationally. He’s doing all this and only playing the 6th most minutes on the team, at 45%. That number should rise a bit.

I might be most intrigued by his defensive potential. Culver is listed at 6’5″, 190 pounds. He’s got quick feet and really long arms. They are noticeably long when you watch him play, and he does a good job of using his length to distress his opponents. He’s just a really good on-ball defender. He currently has a Block Rate of 3.8% and a Steal Rate of 3.1%. Both of those rank in the top-350 nationally.

As he gains more experience over the next four years, he could become a real lockdown defender in the league. Paired with his fellow freshman, Zhaire Smith, who is also a terrific defender, it looks like Chris Beard has found two very capable wings for the next four years. Beard finding these two is also another reason to never rely fully on recruiting rankings; diamonds in the rough can be found and can help contribute immediately.

Coming Up: 11/30 vs. Seton Hall at Madison Square Garden, 12/5 vs. Nevada

6. Oklahoma Sooners (Last Week: 6th)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 4-1, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 21st, +19.45

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 112.4, 36th, 6th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 92.9, 18th, 5th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 77.1, 4th, 1st



Trae Young was one of the stars from the PK80 Invitational in Portland this past weekend. Young put up ludicrous numbers, averaging 34.7 points and 6.7 assists over three games. He shot 30-58 from the field, 11-28 on 3-pointers, and 33-35 from the FT line. That is a .517/.393/.943 split; that’s about as close as you can get to being a 50/40/90 shooter without actually being one.

On the season, Young is averaging 28.2 points, 8.6 assists, and 4.2 rebounds. He’s shooting 39% from 3 and making 3.4 threes per game (2nd in the Big 12, only behind Svi Mykhailiuk). He’s currently 1st in Kenpom’s Player of the Year rankings. His usage rate is 6th in the nation, at 36%, and his Offensive Rating 127.5, which is 2nd in the Big 12 of players who have used 24% of possessions. He’s putting up insane numbers, especially for a freshman. Guys don’t just have usage rates that high and maintain such a high offensive efficiency rating like he’s doing.

This may be a controversial opinion considering his shooting stroke, but his passing is my favorite part of his game. He’s currently 5th in the nation is assist rate, at 46.9%. There were some recruiting analysts who compared Young’s shooting ability and willingness to pull from anywhere to Steph Curry. That’s obviously an unfair comparison, but I’m about to do something annoyingly similar. His passing ability at times reminds me of Curry a bit.

Take a look at these three passes made by Young in their victory over Oregon.

As evidenced by those first and third clips, much like Curry, Young is not afraid to whip a pass a great distance with one hand, and he often does it with ridiculous accuracy. That third pass is not a pass most college players can even see, let alone perform with such accuracy. On the second pass, you can see how Young uses the threat of his perimeter shooting to get into the paint. Defenders have to pick him up a couple steps outside the 3-point line, because of his shooting prowess, but he also has the speed and ball-handling ability to get into the paint. And once he gets there, he can either finish creatively, or he’ll pull out a clever drop-off pass like he did in the second clip.

Even when Young make a mistake, it doesn’t affect him for long.

That clip starts off with Young trying an audacious lob pass that is intercepted quite easily by the defense. After Oregon scores, Young immediately goes back to work, dribbling through defenders with ease to get into the paint before delivering a terrific bounce pass through traffic for a lay-in. He’s not just a scorer and great shooter; he’s also an incredibly skilled passer. Enjoy watching him this season; we might only get one year of him in Norman.

Coming Up: 11/30 vs. North Texas, 12/4 vs UT-San Antonio

7. Texas Longhorns (Last Week: 7th)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 5-2, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 28th, +18.05

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 108.4, 74th, 10th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 90.3, 6th, 2nd

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 69.9, 197th, 7th

Similar to Trae Young, Texas has a newcomer in Dylan Osetkowski who has had a major impact on the team this season, and much like Young, Osetkowski is a terrific passer. Take a look at his five assists (plus one pass that led to a foul) in their PK80 semifinal against Duke.

Osetkowski does a great job using his speed (or lack thereof) to his advantage. Osetkowski is not quick, but he plays at that slower speed effectively. It reminds me a little bit of the former Iowa State player, Georges Niang. In the third play in the clip above (starting at 0:18), Osetkowski receives the ball in the middle of the 2-3 zone. He holds the ball for what feels like an abnormally long time, but Osetkowski is used to playing at a slower pace. He doesn’t get nervous holding it that long; a lot of players panic with the ball in the high post of a 2-3 zone, but he doesn’t. He surveys the court, fakes a pass to the left wing, fakes a pass towards the rim, and then finds Matt Coleman in the right corner for an open look. Holding it that long actually causes the Duke defense to move more than it needs to; the defenders just feel like they should be moving and rotating. That’s what defenders in a zone are supposed to do. Osetkowski uses his patience to his advantage.

Osetkowski currently leads Texas in usage rate, at 27%, which I did not expect before the season. We all expected him to be a major contributor, but not to this level. His Offensive Rating is lower than I thought it would be based on watching him. His ORtg is only 103.2. He’s shooting 2-18 from 3, is only shooting 68% from the FT line, and his turnover rate is higher than his assist rate. (This might be because his passes often go to Texas perimeter players who still cannot shoot.) He’s shooting 55% in the restricted area, so that’s not the issue. He may just need to cut back on his 3-pointers, but Texas would also really benefit if they could rely on him to make a couple 3’s a game. They need perimeter shooting (they’re currently 328th in the nation, at 27.2%).

All of these factors contribute to his lower than expected Offensive Rating, but it just feels like Texas’ offense just flows more smoothly when he is in the game. This is when you have to balance analytics with what you see on the court. They both matter. I’d expect Osetkowski’s efficiency to improve, but if it doesn’t, then I may need to take a closer look at his tape. Maybe he’ll stop shooting 3’s as much. But at this point in time, he seems to be having a major positive impact for this Texas team.

Coming Up: 12/5 at VCU

8. Kansas State Wildcats (Last Week: 8th)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 6-1, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 43rd, +15.12

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 111.4, 46th, 7th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 96.3, 40th, 9th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 67.2, 317th, 9th



Last week, I used the Kansas State space to talk about the shooting statistics of Kamau Stokes and Barry Brown. Before the season, I was worried about the jump shooting of these two, and how it hurt Kansas State last season and could potentially hurt them this season. Here is what I wrote last week.

I had concerns about Kansas State’s offense before the season based on Kamau Stokes and Barry Brown’s shooting statistics from last season. Stokes and Brown both shot often, but not well. Brown was 33rd out of 38 qualifying Big 12 players in eFG% at 47.5%. Stokes was even worse, ranking 35th at 45.1%. These two could not make shots inside the 3-point line. Stokes finished the season at 34.8% on 2-point shots, which was last in the Big 12. Brown was somewhat better, but still not great in the grand scheme of things, as he shot 46.6%, which was 44th out of 58 qualifying players in the Big 12 (per Kenpom). These two have the ball in their hands so often in Bruce Weber’s offense, and they need to shoot it better consistently for the Wildcats to be successful. So far this season through four games, neither has been considerably better compared to last season.

Let’s update that chart following Kansas State playing three games since my last Power Rankings post, including two in Las Vegas against better competition in Arizona State and George Washington.

Stokes has been on fire in the last week, going 12-21 (57%) from 3 in the last three games. He’s improved his eFG% significantly compared to last season, shooting 57.4% this year compared to 45.1% last season. If he keeps shooting like this, he’ll officially have quelled my preseason concerns on him.

Brown has still looked so-so to me. His numbers have slightly improved from 2-point range but have decreased from behind the arc. All of this is obviously affected by the sample size, which is still very small, but Brown continually takes tough jumpers. According to barttorvik.com, Brown is really struggling on 2-pointers not taken at the rim this season, going 6-20 in that category. If you examine his shot chart from Synergy, there are some warning signs. He’s struggling quite a bit from midrange, and he is still taking a few too many long two’s for my liking. This is something to keep an eye on moving forward.

Coming Up: 12/3 at Vanderbilt, 12/5 vs. USC Upstate

9. Iowa State Cyclones (Last Week: 9th)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 4-2, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 59th, +11.70

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 110.6, 55th, 8th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 98.9, 79th, 10th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 70.2, 181st, 6th

Nick Weiler-Babb appears to have taken a leap as a shooter this season. Last year, Weiler-Babb was 8-26 for the entire season on 3-pointers, a 31% mark. This year, he is currently shooting 43% on 3-pointers, at 9-21 from deep through six games.

Weiler-Babb has the ball in his hands a lot more this season. He is playing PG for Steve Prohm since the third game of the season. Last year when Weiler-Babb would get minutes, he was always playing as a wing. This was due to the presence of Monte Morris and Deonte Burton, who deservedly had the ball in their hands. Weiler-Babb seems much more at ease as a shooter off the dribble.

This season, he is 6-12 from 3 as a pick and roll ball-handler, per Synergy Sports. On spot-ups from 3, he is currently 2-7. Last season, he was 5-17 on spot-up threes. (Last season, he only had three attempts from 3 as a pick and roll ball handler or in isolation, but he was 2-3 in those scenarios. Take that small sample size for what it’s worth.) It’s possible he’s quite simply just a better shooter from 3 off of the dribble rather than off of a pass.

Take a look at how comfortable he is rising up from 3 off of a ballscreen.

On 4 of those 5 attempts, he uses the screen, sees his man going under or dying on the screen, and confidently rises up off of one dribble. It looks very smooth and fluid. The third three in that clip is my favorite. Weiler-Babb is in total command of that ballscreen action. He uses an in-and-out dribble to set up his defender for the first screen, comes back to the right for a re-screen, probes for a half-second to freeze the defense, and then steps back and nails a three. It’s nice to see a player in total control of an action like that.

Keep an eye on how Weiler-Babb shoots from 3-point range moving forward. Defenders will have to stop going under screens, and if they don’t, he seems totally comfortable right now rising from distance. If he can join Donovan Jackson and Lindell Wigginton in being an effective perimeter shooter, Iowa State’s offensive potential will rise.

Coming Up: 12/4 vs. Northern Illinois, 12/7 vs. Iowa

10. Oklahoma State Cowboys (Last Week: 9th)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 6-1, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 48th, +14.17

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 110.4, 58th, 9th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 96.2, 38th, 8th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 70.9, 134th, 5th



Before the season, I wondered in my Oklahoma State preview if Jeffrey Carroll’s offensive profile would change this season. I wrote the below in that preview.

Carroll used a majority of his possessions in spot-up situations or in transition. In total, those accounted for 57.7% of his possessions (32% for spot-ups, 25.7% for transition). He only had 14 possessions all of last season in isolation and just 14 possessions as a pick-and-roll ball handler. Those both represent 2.9% of all of his possessions (see chart below). Carroll will likely have the ball in his hands much more this season; he is Oklahoma State’s clear best player after all. How much more is the question, and can he have the same high efficiency in those scenarios?

My main question was, “would we see him as a ball-handler more often?” So far, the answer is a resounding no. Carroll has now played four games this season, and his play type chart looks very similar to last season.

His main possession types are still spot-up situations and in transition. Last season, they represented 57.7% of his possessions. This season, they currently represent 58% of his possessions. That’s about as close as you can get. Carroll has only been a pick and roll ball handler once and only been in isolation three times. So when I wrote this before the season — “Carroll will likely have the ball in his hands much more this season; he is Oklahoma State’s clear best player after all.” — I really could not have been more wrong.

What’s most concerning here is not necessarily the distribution; if he’s a spot-up shooter, he’s a spot-up shooter. That’s not a slight; every player has a role. What’s most concerning is the effectiveness. Carroll’s Offensive Rating after four games is 106.3. Last season, he finished the season at 130.4. His efficiency in those spot-up situations has been quite poor, at only 0.5 PPP. Last season, it was 1.07. You’re seeing what happens when a spot-up shooter loses the PG in Jawun Evans who allowed him to have so many open looks.

Carroll is just not making shots right now. He’s 5-22 (23%) from 3 on the season. He won’t shoot it that bad all season. The major question for Oklahoma State is — will that percentage get close to last season’s number of 44% or will it be closer to his sophomore season, when he shot 33%? For a player that’s as important to his team as Carroll is, that could be the difference in winning two to three more conference games.

Coming Up: 12/3 vs. Mississippi Valley State