This is the 7th edition of my Big 12 Power Rankings. The Big 12 season tips off today. I seriously cannot wait. The debate over the “best” conference in the country is often confusing to me. Are we talking about the conference with the most teams who could win it all or the conference that has the highest number of good teams or the conference with the fewest amount of weak teams? We can’t debate this if we don’t know the guidelines of the debate. Nonetheless, there is no argument to this — the conference is clearly the deepest in the country.

This week’s post is going to be a bit different than weeks past. There’s only been six games involving Big 12 teams since last Thursday’s post, and only two of them really mattered: Texas/Alabama and Northwestern/Oklahoma. So there won’t be any game clips or in-depth breakdowns of things I’ve noticed in the last week. Instead, I’m going to use each team’s space as an opportunity to be both optimistic and pessimistic about that team based on a statistic or trend I’ve noticed so far this season. This is a good way to examine a major strength and weakness of each team as we forecast how this conference season will go.

It’s a reset as we head into conference play. The order of this week’s rankings are representative of what I think the conference standings will look like once the conference season is completed in early March. I will include a projected conference record for each team in their section.

All of my previous Power Rankings posts, as well as the season previews I wrote, can be found at this link. For any newcomers, below is a blurb I wrote in my first Power Rankings post this season. (If you’ve been here before, go ahead and skip ahead to the good stuff.) The below inset is what I’ve decided is essentially my mission statement for this weekly article. Give it a read if you’re new.

“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.”

Alright, let’s dive 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. All clips are pulled from WatchESPN or uploaded games on YouTube. So if I haven’t pulled many clips on your team, it’s because their games can’t be found on those platforms, not because I don’t want to. Once conference play rolls around and basically every Big 12 game is on ESPN, the clip count between teams should even out.

1. Kansas Jayhawks (Last Week: 2nd)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 10-2, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 6th, +24.86

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 115.8, 17th, 3rd

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 91.0, 8th, 3rd

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 71.0, 114th, 5th



Predicted Conference Record/Finish: 12-6, T-1st

Reason for Optimism: This Kansas team is currently shooting the ball from the perimeter better than any Bill Self team — that incluedes last year’s team which shot over 40% from 3 for the season. The Jayhawks are currently shooting 41.5% from 3, which ranks 12th in the country and 1st in the Big 12. Graham, Vick, and Mykhailiuk are shooting 45% or better from 3. Malik Newman is currently shooting a very respectable 37% from deep. This team will constantly put pressure on defenses with their ability to knock down perimeter shots, and unlike last year, they’ve got a more reliable low post scorer in Udoka Azubuike to play through on offense to help generate some of this space on the perimeter. Some Kansas fans would say this reliance on 3-point shooting is a reason for pessimism, but I disagree. To make the Final Four, you’ve got to have great guard play, and you’ve got to be able to make shots. This team will do that all season.

Reason for Pessimism: The below image does a great job of showing my two biggest concerns for this Kansas team (I wrote about both of these in my Dec. 14 Power Rankings post). It shows the history for Kansas in key statistics and metrics over the last five years, per Kenpom. There are two loud, blinking lights that stand out to me. The first is that ghastly number in red in the FTR column on offense. Kansas currently gets to the FT line less than every single team in the country, ranking 351st out of 351 teams with a FT Rate of 18.2%. That number is half of last year’s rate, which was 36%. Kansas no longer has Frank Mason and Josh Jackson, and it shows. Those two guys were terrific at getting to the line, and there is no one like them on this year’s team. The highest FT Rate among starters is Devonte’ Graham at 26%. Next is Azubuike at 22%. For comparison, last year’s team had three starters over 40% — Frank Mason at 48%, Landen Lucas at 48%, and Josh Jackson at 40%. If they can’t get to the FT line, they become even more reliant on their 3-point shooting.

The second issue is their defensive 3PA% (3-pointers attempted of total field goals attempted) in the 3rd column from the far right. They’re currently allowing their opponents to shoot threes 41% of the time, which is by far the worst number in the last five seasons and the worst number in the Bill Self era. It’s currently not killing them as their opponents haven’t been making 3-pointers that frequently — opposition is currently shooting 33% on threes, which ranks 96th in defensive 3-point FG%. But relying on your opponents to miss 3-pointers is a fickle strategy; it can turn on you quickly (check Kenpom articles here and here for empirical proof). The best way to prevent threes is to not let opponents shoot them. Kansas has to see this number improve moving forward.

Coming Up: 12/29 at Texas, 1/2 vs. Texas Tech

2. West Virginia Mountaineers (Last Week: 1st)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 11-1, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 12th, +22.03

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 114.4, 21st, 4th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 92.4, 13th, 4th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 74.6, 25th, 2nd



Predicted Conference Record/Finish: 12-6, T-1st

Reason for Optimism: This is the best 2-point shooting team and FT shooting of Bob Huggins’ entire tenure in Morgantown. They are currently shooting 50.5% on 2-pointers and 72.4% from the FT line. This team is built on the following things: full-court pressure defense, offensive rebounding, getting to the FT line. Those first two things often lead to easy 2-pointers and/or trips to the FT line. If they’re shooting better from those two areas than they ever have under Huggins, it shows that this team might not be as bogged down on offense as some previous Press Virginia era teams.

If they want to make a run to the Final 4, they’re going to have to be able to score more efficiently than previous years, and this Mountaineers team might have more offensive talent than years past. Jevon Carter, Daxter Miles, and James Bolden can all score (and shoot it well) in the backcourt. Lamont West is making serious progress on the wing, and Esa Ahmad will be back at some point soon.

Reason for Pessimism: I’m concerned about the frontcourt depth. As we get into conference play and West Virginia faces better big men night after night, is there anyone Bob Huggins trusts behind Sagaba Konate? Maciej Bender is Konate’s current backup, but his minutes have been spotty at best. Against Virginia, Huggins only trusted him to be on the court for six minutes of action. In the last four games, the most minutes he recorded in a single game was 14 versus Pittsburgh. Konate is not fouling as much this season compared to last season. He’s currently committing 4.8 fouls per 40 minutes — last year, that number was at 7.6. That’s a good thing, but it could change suddenly. When Konate gets in foul trouble in Big 12 play, Bender is going to have to play more and play better. If he doesn’t, we could see Huggins get creative with some lineups.

Coming Up: 12/29 at Oklahoma State, 1/1 at Kansas State

3. Oklahoma Sooners (Last Week: 4th)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 10-1, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 15th, +21.30

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 116.4, 14th, 2nd

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 95.1, 32nd, 6th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 78.3, 5th, 1st



Predicted Conference Record/Finish: 11-7, 3rd

Reason for Optimism: Trae Young. I hate to be simple about this, but sometimes the simplest answer is the correct one. Young has played above and beyond the wildest expectations, and because of him and him alone, Oklahoma has a legitimate shot at winning the Big 12 and reaching their second Final Four in three years.

I’ve written about Trae Young in multiple Power Rankings posts (find those here), so I don’t want to repeat too much of what I’ve already written. But, he is currently the best player in the country. He leads the country in both points and assists, leads the country in both usage rate and assist rate, and still somehow has an offensive rating of 129.5, despite that high usage rate. I’ve described him as a supernova at times this season, and it’s true. The kid is revolutionary, and he’s the type of revolutionary talent that can transform a team into a title contender. In March, often the most important thing is guard play. Well, there’s no team in the country that has a better guard than Oklahoma in Trae Young. He could end up being THE story of this college basketball season.

Reason for Pessimism: I’m not sure if this defense is good enough to win a Big 12 title or reach a Final Four. In 2015, Oklahoma made the Sweet 16 and in 2016, they made the Final Four. Everyone talked about Buddy Hield and their guard play, but those two teams were very good on defense. In 2015, their Adj. Defense at Kenpom was 89.7, which was 7th in the country. In 2016, that number was 94.1, good for 17th in the country. Currently, they are at 95.2 points per 100 possessions, which ranks 32nd nationally. This team isn’t quite as stingy as those 2015 and 2016 teams. The 2015 team opponents’ eFG% was 44.1%, the 2016 team opponents’ eFG% was 47.2%, but this year’s team defensive eFG% is 48.8%. Both their 2-point FG%, 3-point FG%, and (perhaps most importantly) 3PA% on defense are all higher than 2015 and 2016. Those numbers will have to be cleaned up to make a serious run.

Coming Up: 12/30 at TCU, 12/3 vs. Oklahoma State

4. TCU Horned Frogs (Last Week: 3rd)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 12-0, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 24th, +19.23

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 117.0, 10th, 1st

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 97.8, 61st, 8th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 71.8, 87th, 3rd



Predicted Conference Record/Finish: 10-8, 4th

Reason for Optimism: This offense is the best in the Big 12, and I see it staying there for the whole season. I wrote about TCU’s offense in this Power Rankings post, but their spread pick and roll offense is some of the prettiest offense you’ll see in the Big 12 this season. They currently have the 10th ranked offense in the nation, per Kenpom, at 117.0 adjusted points per 100 possessions. Having so many shooters on the court at all times has created so much space for their offense to operate. There are always openings and gaps for players to create.

Their shooting statistics are tremendous — 5th in the nation in eFG% at 59.8%, 14th in 3-point FG% at 41%, 12th in 2-point FG% at 59%. Kenrich Williams and Desmond Bane are both shooting over 50% on threes, and Jaylen Fisher, Vladimir Brodziansky, and Kouat Noi are all over 40%. It’s just really hard to imagine them ever struggling on offense, especially with Jamie Dixon’s history of having top-40 offenses per Kenpom. He knows how to coach offense, and this might be one of his most offensively talented groups ever.

Reason for Pessimism: What’s going on with Vladimir Brodziansky? Brodziansky hasn’t been bad by any means, but he’s been a bit disappointing. He was a Preseason 1st Team All-Big 12 selection, but his play has dipped since last season. His scoring has gone from 14.1 PPG to 13.5 PPG. His rebounding has dipped from 5.7 per game to only 4.3. He’s still playing the same amount of minutes as last season, which is a surprise right? You’d expect a guy who was preseason all-conference to have a larger role than the previous season, but he just doesn’t. He’s taken a back seat to Kenrich Williams, Jaylen Fisher, and others. He’s still incredibly efficient from the field. He has the 7th highest eFG% in the entire country, but the opportunities haven’t been as frequent. He’s shooting it just 20% of the time when he’s on the court, down from 26.8% last season. He just seems a bit uncomfortable at times this season. His play and total production will need to improve if TCU is to challenge for the regular season title.

Coming Up: 12/30 vs. Oklahoma, 12/2 at Baylor

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

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 11-1, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 10th, +22.30

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 112.2, 40th, 7th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 89.9, 6th, 2nd

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 70.1, 163rd, 7th



Predicted Conference Record/Finish: 9-9, 5th

Reason for Optimism: I could not have been more wrong about the impact Texas Tech’s freshmen would have on this team. Because of their lower recruiting rankings, I thought they’d get spot minutes but never seriously contribute. Zhaire Smith and Jarrett Culver have proven me to be so wrong. Those two have been tremendous, and their play increases the potential for success for this Texas Tech team. They are the 2nd and 3rd leading scorers for the Red Raiders behind Keenan Evans. I don’t think anyone would have predicted either guy to be in the top 5 on this team, let alone both of them being in the top 3.

What’s most encouraging is their defense. Both have great bodies — Culver is 6’5″, 190 pounds and Smith is 6’5″, 195 pounds. They both have long arms that make them look three inches taller. I actually saw someone describe Zhaire Smith as a mini-Zach Smith, and I thought that was perfect; mini-Smith shows some serious tendencies of older-Smith at times with his athleticism and leaping ability. These two continue to see increased roles and increased minutes — they are 3rd and 4th on the team in minutes. Their defensive contributions are one of the reasons Texas Tech currently has the 6th best defense in the country — allowing only 89.9 adjusted points per 100 possessions. I’m excited to see them progress through Big 12 play.

Reason for Pessimism: I wrote about this in the season preview for Texas Tech, and it still looks like it could be an issue. This team is a good 3-point shooting team that apparently refuses to shoot them. They are currently 97th in the nation, shooting 37% as a team from 3-point range. But yet, they are 302nd in the nation in 3PA%, shooting 3-pointers only 32% of the time. Of players who have attempted 15 threes or more, Tommy Hamilton, Culver, Niem Stevenson, and Brandone Francis are all shooting better than 40% from the 3-point line. Keenan Evans is shooting 35%. Davide Moretti is shooting 38%. This team has shooters; they just don’t shoot threes.

This is partly due to Chris Beard’s traditional motion offense. It often makes the floor seem cramped; it’s like a 5-person family living in a 2-bedroom apartment. There’s just not enough space to move freely and feel comfortable. Beard has countered this by playing smaller lineups at times this season, with Zach Smith at the 5 and Zhaire Smith , Culver or Gray at the 4. This helps their spacing and their offensive potential. I think it could be the most played lineup moving forward. It may need to be to allow this team to shoot it from deep as often as they should.

Coming Up: 12/29 vs. Baylor, 12/2 at Kansas

6. Baylor Bears (Last Week: 6th)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 10-2, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 28th, +18.22

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 113.1, 32nd, 5th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 94.9, 29th, 5th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 65.8, 333rd, 10th

Predicted Conference Record/Finish: 8-10, T-6th

Reason for Optimism: Once again, the Baylor zone defense is causing opponents all sorts of trouble. Their defense is currently 29th in the nation per Kenpom’s Adjusted Defense metric, allowing 94.9 points per 100 possessions. Opponents currently have an eFG% of only 45% versus Baylor, which is the 25th lowest in the country. They can’t make 3’s against the extended shape of the zone — opponents are shooting 31% from deep, the 37th best mark for a defense nationally.

I often think defensive 3-point FG% is fool’s gold (see Kansas section for Kenpom links), but with Baylor, it’s a bit different. Their zone combined with the long-armed players in it can really affect shooters. Having multiple 6’9″ long-armed guys close out on you makes shooting difficult. And when opponents go into the paint, they’re currently being blocked 13.4% of the time — which ranks 41st nationally. The defense has been tremendous, and they’re not fouling either. Baylor currently has the 2nd best defensive FT Rate in the country, at 20%. Scott Drew’s zone doesn’t get the credit or attention that Jim Boeheim’s zone at Syracuse gets, but it’s just as good.

Reason for Pessimism: Manu Lecomte’s offensive rating is currently superb — it’s at 131.6, good for 45th nationally. But it can’t all be on Lecomte. Currently, Lecomte is taking 25% of all shots when he is on the court. Jo Lual-Acuil is right there with him at 24.7%, but there’s so much more responsibility on Lecomte’s shoulders. Lual-Acuil’s shots often come as a result of Lecomte’s playmaking ability or the focus on Lecomte. After those two, the next highest shot rate is King McClure at 21%, followed by Nuni Omot at 18% and Tristan Clark at 17%.

Lecomte has made 42 3-pointers on the season — he’s currently 42-91 on the season, a 46% clip. The rest of Baylor’s primary rotation has made 44 3-pointers. That’s seven other players (Lual-Acuil, Vital, McClure, Omot, Clark, Maston, Lindsey), and they’ve only made two more 3-pointers than Lecomte. He needs help out there. I talked about this in a Power Rankings post back when Baylor played Wichita State, but there are far too many possessions that turn into, “hey Manu, go do something for us.” That’s okay in the non-conference portion of the schedule, but once the conference grind kicks in, it may be too much for him. I’m a bit worried about Baylor. I would not be surprised if they’re a bubblish team once late February gets here.

Coming Up: 12/29 at Texas Tech, 12/2 vs. TCU

7. Texas Longhorns (Last Week: 7th)

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 9-3, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 32nd, +17.34

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 104.6, 142nd, 10th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 87.3, 2nd, 1st

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 68.0, 256th, 8th

Predicted Conference Record/Finish: 8-10, T-6th

Reason for Optimism: Having the 2nd best defense in the nation is something you can’t ignore. Texas has been superb on that end, and that gives them a shot in every game. In last week’s Power Rankings, I compared Texas’ statistical profile — top 10 defense and non-top 100 offense — to other teams from the last five seasons. Here was that table.

I was concerned about their likelihood to make the NCAA Tournament with this type of profile. It’s been inconsistent whether or not a profile like this is an NIT team or an NCAA Tournament team. Well, if Texas keeps playing defense as good as they’re playing, I think they won’t be concerned about the NIT. Their Adj. Defense on Kenpom has now improved even further — it’s currently at 87.3. That would be the best defense of any team on the above table. Even if their offense is struggling, their +17.34 Efficiency Margin is still +17. So even though I’m still pretty concerned about their offense, their defensive performance may make my concerns overstated. We shall see. Nonetheless, this defense is seriously good (Mo Bamba and his 4 blocks per game says hi), and I’m excited to see how it performs against Kansas in their Big 12 opener.

Reason for Pessimism: Shooting, shooting, shooting. I wrote about this in the Texas season preview and in a couple Power Rankings posts, but it’s still true. This team is very bad at shooting the basketball and seeing it actually go through the net. They are currently 344th in the nation in 3-point FG%, shooting 28% from deep. This is somehow even worse than last year’s 29% mark. They’re even struggling from the FT line, shooting 62% as a team from the charity stripe, which ranks 341st nationally. Once again, this is somehow worse than last year’s 65% mark from the FT line.

There’s just not many shooters on this team. Look at these 3-point shooting numbers: Dylan Osetkowski is currently 11-44 (25%), Matt Coleman is 9-37 (24%), Kerwin Roach is 9-29 (31%), Jacob Young is 10-34 (29%), Eric Davis is 8-27 (29%), Mo Bamba is 3-19 (16%). The only guy who has shot it well from deep is Andrew Jones (16-37, 43%), and he’s currently injured. Now it sounds like he may be back for the conference opener against Kansas or their second game at Iowa State. They need him. If he’s back, that odd statistical profile may start to look less odd; he can improve their offensive numbers.

Coming Up: 12/29 vs. Kansas, 12/1 at Iowa State

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

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 10-2, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 43rd, +14.57

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 112.5, 38th, 6th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 97.9, 64th, 9th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 66.0, 323rd, 9th



Predicted Conference Record/Finish: 7-11, T-8th

Reason for Optimism: This is the best Kansas State shooting team in Bruce Weber’s tenure in Manhattan. Their eFG% this season is currently 55%. Previous seasons have seen eFG% numbers of 53%, 48%, 48%, 49%, and 49%. This group of players has shown an ability over the last two seasons to shoot it consistently well. Their current eFG% of 55% ranks 44th nationally and 5th in the Big 12. They’re shooting 58% on 2-pointers, good for 18th nationally and 3rd in the Big 12. Dean Wade, Xavier Sneed, and Kamau Stokes are the three guys who are shooting it best. Their eFG% are 61%, 54%, and 57% respectively. Wade has been especially good, as he’s shooting 64% on 2-pointers. These three have taken a noticeable leap since last season.

I think the assumption about Kansas State teams is that they are defensively focused and struggle on offense. That just isn’t true this season. If you hear someone saying that this season, drop some knowledge on them. This team is good on offense.

Reason for Pessimism: In previous years, when Kansas State did struggle on offense, they could rely on getting to the FT line. In the last three seasons, they finished in the top-40 nationally in FT Rate each season — 35th in 2017 at 41%, 38th in 2016 at 43%, 19th in 2015 at 46%. This year’s team currently has a FT Rate of only 32%, which ranks 217th nationally. If those shooting numbers start to dip or if they have a rough shooting night from the field, there are less guys on this team who can get to the foul line consistently to find easy points. Hopefully, that won’t be a concern.

A knowledgeable Kansas State fan would probably point out to me that those 2015 and 2016 teams weren’t good enough to make the NCAA Tournament. That’s a reasonable argument. Maybe those teams relied on the FT line because they were weaker elsewhere on offense. This team doesn’t have those same weaknesses. It’ll be interesting to see if this lower FT rate ends up mattering or not, but I have a tinge of worry.

Coming Up: 12/29 at Iowa State, 1/1 vs. West Virginia

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

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 9-2, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 75th, +8.83

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 109.1, 74th, 9th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 100.3, 101st, 10th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 70.4, 142nd, 6th

Predicted Conference Record/Finish: 7-11, T-8th

Reason for Optimism: The guard play for the Cyclones has been incredibly encouraging. Nick Weiler-Babb, Lindell Wigginton, and Donovan Jackson have all been great. Jackson is averaging 16.2 PPG on 41% from 3-point range. Wigginton has been the 2nd best freshman in the Big 12; he’s averaging 15.5 PPG on 45% shooting on 3’s. But I want to focus on the play of Nick Weiler-Babb.

Iowa State lost their first two games in embarrassing fashion, losing by 15 at Missouri before somehow losing by 18 at home to Milwaukee. In those two games, Iowa State was rotating ball-handling duties between the three guards, with Jackson and Wigginton handling a majority of the responsibility. After the loss to Milwaukee, Steve Prohm handed full PG duties to Nick Weiler-Babb, and his play has blossomed. Iowa State has won nine straight games, and Weiler-Babb is averaging 12.5 points, 7.5 rebounds, and 7.4 assists. Using College Basketball Reference’s great Play Index tool, I discovered Weiler-Babb is the ONLY player in the nation averaging 12 PPG, 7 RPG, and 7 APG. That’s quite the accomplishment. In the last five seasons, only two other players have done the same — Michigan State’s Denzel Valentine in 2016 and BYU’s Kyle Collinswoth in 2016. Those are two guys who have both played in the NBA.

Weiler-Babb’s current play is currently not being talked about nationally, but if Iowa State continues their hot streak into Big 12 play, he’s going to get some serious notoriety. He deserves it; his play has completely changed the outlook for this Iowa State season after those first two games.

Reason for Pessimism: Defense has never been the staple of Iowa State basketball during the Fred Hoiberg and Steve Prohm years. They’ve been very good offensive teams who have done enough on defense to win games. This year, the defensive trend has continued. Let’s compare this team to the team from two seasons ago, because it’s an oddly perfect comparison. This season, Iowa State’s Adjusted Defense is currently 100.3 points per 100 possessions, which is the exact same number that the 2016 team ended at — 100.3 points/100 possessions. So the trend has continued right? Mediocre defense and great offense right? Not exactly. Per Kenpom’s Adjusted Offense statistic, this year’s team is scoring 109.1 points per 100 possessions, much lower than 2016’s 121.2 points/100 possessions.

If this ISU team wants to make the NCAA Tournament again, one side of the ball will have to get better. Either that offense will have to return to 2016 and 2017 levels. Or their defense will have to look more like 2017 Iowa State (96.3 points/100 possessions) rather than their current level of 100.3 points/100 possessions.

Coming Up: 12/29 vs. Kansas State, 1/1 vs. Texas

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

Current Record (Overall/Conference): 10-2, 0-0

Kenpom Ranking and AdjEM: 47th, +13.73

Adj. Offense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 109.3, 72nd, 8th

Adj. Defense (Efficiency, National Rank, Conference Rank): 95.6, 38th, 7th

Adj. Tempo (Possessions/Game, National Rank, Conference Rank): 71.2, 103rd, 4th



Predicted Conference Record/Finish: 6-12, 10th

Reason for Optimism: Before the season, in my Oklahoma State preview, I wondered if Mike Boynton would be able to improve this team on defense after a serious decline under Brad Underwood last year. Underwood’s 2017 team ranked 155th in Adjusted Defense in Kenpom, allowing 103.5 points per 100 possessions. Well, Boynton has not only improved the defense, he’s made it legitimately good. They currently rank 38th nationally in defense, allowing 95.6 points per 100 possessions. That’s an 8-point improvement in a single season, which is super impressive. Boynton has ramped up the intensity on defense. Oklahoma State is pressuring the ball with a ferocity, overplaying passing lanes, and playing with a frenetic energy.

What you see when you watch them matches what you see in the stats. There’s no doubt in their rank being 38th nationally. I believe it fully when I watch them play. Their defense is the primary reason they are currently ranked 47th in Kenpom with a projected conference record of 7-11 rather than 4-14 or 5-13.

Reason for Pessimism: I’m still seriously concerned about this team’s shot creation ability. Other than Jeffrey Carroll, I don’t think there’s a single guy on this team who can go get a shot for himself in times of need. Every guy on the roster needs help, whether through an offensive set or through the play of a teammate. Now that’s not always a bad thing. In my Power Rankings post last week, I did an in-depth breakdown of the ways Mike Boynton is finding his team easy shots with great offensive sets. But at some point, you have to be able to create your own shot against a good defense, and this team struggles with that.

You saw that in the home loss to Wichita State, when OSU only scored 0.94 PPP and had more turnovers than assists. The individual playmaking ability just isn’t there at times. In college basketball, the most common play you’ll see once a team’s original action breaks down is the high screen and roll. Every single college team goes to it with 10-15 seconds left on the shot clock. It’s what you call when you need that individual playmaking ability. Oklahoma State is currently 10th in the Big 12 in pick-and-roll ball-handler possessions (meaning the possession ends in the ball-handler’s hands, whether through a shot or turnover). They are averaging a measly 0.59 PPP in these situations. The 2nd worst team in the Big 12 is Baylor at 0.76 PPP. It’s a serious weakness. In pick-and-roll situations where you include passes, Oklahoma State is averaging 0.78 PPP — still last in the Big 12.

I’ve had people ask me why I predict Oklahoma State to finish worse in the Big 12 than Iowa State, despite Oklahoma State being ranked higher in Kenpom and other predictive measures. This is why. In times of need, whether that’s late in the shot clock or in the last five minutes of a close game, you have to have the playmaking ability to create good shots. Oklahoma State hasn’t shown that ability while Iowa State has. I have more confidence in Iowa State in close games than I do in Oklahoma State. That’s the reason why Oklahoma State is 10th here.

Coming Up: 12/29 vs. West Virginia, 1/3 at Oklahoma