A premature (but not excessively premature) 2009-2010 Big Ten conference basketball preview
OR "How did I let all this football talk distract me from producing basketball scatter plots?"
Now that I've thrown my blogging lot in with a couple football nuts, my old "basketball's WAY better than football, even in August" shtick probably doesn't work as well. Nevertheless, I feel compelled to point out that we're now more than halfway through the long, cold college basketball offseason. It's been 121 days since our Spartans were vanquished in the national championship game, and there are fewer than 100 days left until the basketball team suits up for the first exhibition game this November.
It's about time, then, to take a look at the lay of the land in the Big Ten for the 2009-10 basketball season. And what better way to survey any basketball landscape than with a scatter plot? Details and Excel-generated goodness after the jump.
Broadly speaking, any college basketball team's prospects for an upcoming basketball season are a function of three things:
- How good they were the previous season.
- How many of the players that made them that good are coming back for the upcoming season.
- How many new players they have coming in likely to make a positive contribution in their first season.
The first two factors are more easily quantifiable than the third. Scatter plot:

The horizontal axis shows the percentage of a team's minutes played during the 2008-09 season by players who are returning for the 2009-10 season. (Notes: (1) I used Kenpom data, so players who played a minimal number of minutes last season aren't included. (2) Here's the list of nonseniors who aren't returning for next season: Jordan (ILL), Mullens (OSU), Grady (MICH), Busch/Payton (MIN), Davis/Kelly/Palmer/Peterson (IOWA), Story/Williams (IU). Transfer list is here.)
The vertical axis shows the team's Kenpom rating from last season. That rating is a function of a team's offensive and defensive efficiency, adjusted for schedule strength.
(Note: I'm stealing this concept from the Big Ten Geeks. But that's what the Geeks get for not posting during the offseason.)
Dividing the scatter plot into four quadrants, you get the team groupings below. I've included a key question for each team.
Teams that were good last year and bring back most of the guys who made them good
- Purdue: Which version of Robbie Hummel's back is returning to school this fall?
- Ohio State: When you only had seven guys play more than 10 minutes/game, is bringing back six of those players enough--considering you have no new incoming players? (Note: David Lighty may be part of the answer to this question.)
- Minnesota: Is Tubby planning on using a 12-man playing rotation?
- Michigan: Where's that third scorer?
Teams that were good last year but lost some of the key guys who made them good
- Michigan State: How many underclassmen does it take to replace one Goran Suton?
- Illinois: Can Demetri McCamey harness his talent to make up for the loss of two seniors (Frazier/Meachem) who didn't have all that much talent but made the team go? (Also: Could the previous sentence been worded any more awkwardly?)
- Wisconsin: Is this the year we finally don't all look silly in predicting a drop-off from Bo Ryan's team?
Team that wasn't very good last year but bring back a lot of guys who will hopefully get a little better
- Northwestern: If last year's team improved by seven games in conference play, can this year's team improve by the 2-3 games it will take to finally go dancing?
Teams that weren't very good last year and also lose some of the guys who made them not very good*
- Penn State: How much more can Talor Battle do? (Initial guess: Probably not everything Jamelle Cornely and Stanley Pringle were doing.)
- Iowa: Should the word "IOWA" on the team's uniforms be replaced with "GATENS PLUS FOUR"?
- Indiana: Can the Hooisers improve to the point they don't screw up all my scatter plots any more?
*Apologies to the NIT Champion Nittany Lions for including them with the other two teams in this category; I had to let the non-IU vertical axis midpoint fall where it may.
Accounting for the third factor, incoming players, is a fairly speculative exercise. Based on what we know about the conference's incoming recruits at this point, it looks like Minnesota, Indiana, and Illinois can expect the biggest contributions right off the bat, with Michigan adding a potential key piece in point guard Darius Morris.
(There's a fourth factor I've skipped over--how much your returning players who didn't play much last season improve during the offseason. But that's even harder to predict than the impact of the incoming recruits.)
Anyway, put all that together and you get the following three-months-out TOC Big Ten basketball power rankings:
- Purdue
- Michigan State
- Minnesota
- Michigan
- Ohio State
- Illinois
- Northwestern
- Wisconsin
- Penn State
- Indiana
- Iowa
With two potential national title contenders and up to nine teams with NCAA Tournament hopes, the conference looks to be as strong as it's been at least since the 2004-05 season (when two Big Ten teams advanced to the Final Four) and maybe as far back as the 1999-2000 season (when the conference last sent seven teams to the Big Dance).
There you go, fellow hoop heads. Hopefully, that helps tide you over for the next three months. And, you know, I have to say, delving back into the basketball stats like this has reminded me of something: Basketball's WAY better than football, even in August.
11 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
2009 - 2010 Big Ten Basketball
I was pleased to hear Lucas’s comments about Sherman and Nix. They could be the next Davis/Lorbeck without the lure of the Soviet pro league. Chris Allen is a question mark on defense, however, he can score a lot more than Walton. That may have to be the trade-off. The rest of the team is solid and deep.
Allen's D improved a lot last season
Relative to Walton he’s still a question mark, obviously, but considering that early in the season he was more of a “@#$%!?!?!?”, I’ll take it.
I think
You underestimate the ability of Iowa to finish 12th this year.
The Rivalry, Esq.
The quintessential Big Ten smoking room.
standings
Your standings look about right to me, though I’m not sold on Purdue. It is not just Hummel’s back. They are not that deep, and I think their style of play — particularly the intense defense — can’t last the entire season. I honestly think we have seen their ceiling, and it is not that high. MSU’s ceiling this year is huge.
For MSU there are a number of imponderables — will Morgan play like the POY we all assumed he’d be last year? will Allen end his shooting slump? How good will Nix and Sherman be? how good is Roe at 100%? But positive answers to even a third of those types of questions and MSU is a legitimate final four team.
The other striking thing from the standings is just the depth of the league. Ohio State is not in the top three, though it arguably has the best player in the league, and has had four top ten recruiting years in a row. The top 8 teams will be really hard to beat on their floor…
and has had four top ten recruiting years in a row.
Three of which are already gone, though. Hard to put too much stock in having that many strong recruiting classes in a row when those rankings are based mostly on one-and-dones. (OSU will be good, but not “four top-10 classes in a row” good.)
OSU
I think we agree — I’m not arguing that OSU will win the league, just that a team that has recruited that well is slated by many to finish at best middle of the pack. I think Matta is a great recruiter, but a mediocre floor coach, and his teams seem to lack chemistry. Still, I don’t doubt that one of the top teams in the league will go into Columbus this year and get seriously kicked around. In a league this strong, away wins will be a rare commodity.
I think these rankings look about right
I think we’ll miss Walton’s D as well – unfortunately individual defensive contributions don’t really show up in tempo free stats so his loss doesn’t have as much impact as Suton’s in the Pomeroy stats. Our remaining perimeter defenders will all have to step up if we want our defensive efficiency to remain as high as it was last year.
I am sold on Purdue if they can find a guard who can hit from 3 point range consistently. Hummel is a very good outside shooter but optimally he’d spend some time closer to the basket as well. They need another guy to stretch the defense a little, i.e. a guard who can shoot somewhere in the vicinity of 38-40 percent from 3 point range. If they find that they’ll have a three pronged inside/outside scoring machine with Jajuan Johnson down low, Hummel being able to score from just about anywhere, and a sharpshooter on the perimeter. It’s pretty much a given that they will be good on D next year.
That's the thing
Their defense is so darn good that if (1) Hummel’s back can stay close to 100% and (2) the offense finally gels, they could be downright scary.
I do have a bias toward downplaying MSU’s odds of success going into a given season, though. Last year I only had them ranked 3rd (behind Purdue/Wisconsin) at this point.
Cheer for The Only Colors: Green and White!
by KJ@theonlycolors on Aug 6, 2009 11:19 AM CDT up reply actions
Huh?
Why does Penn State rank as a “not very good team”? Weren’t they 1 win away from ending up 2nd in the Big Ten instead of 4th? only lost a few games and won the NIT..maybe they are’nt the upper cut, but better than “not very good”
Im not
saying this to be a trolling Penn State fan, I just think they’re a little better than “not very good”..not trying to fight or anything but maybe a lil more respect
Respect
That was the point of the italicized note.
Sorry for not replying earlier; just saw your comments today.
Cheer for The Only Colors: Green and White!
by KJ@theonlycolors on Aug 24, 2009 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions

by 


















