With the transfers of Udoh and Freeman, the dismissal of Bassett and Ellis, and the decision by Kosta Koufos to hire an agent, the conference landscape for next season appears to be relatively well settled. So–with just 8 short months to go before 2009 conference play begins–let’s take a look at how the 11 Big Ten men’s basketball teams stack up.
I’ve ranked the teams according to my own subjective judgment of their relative strength. For each team, I’ve listed the players who are leaving–due to either graduation, transfer, or early draft entry–as well as a projected starting lineup. As indicated in the title to this post, the lineups are pretty back-of-the-envelope, based on minutes played this past season for returning players and recruiting ratings for new players. Players who have both their first and last names listed are new to the program. In some cases, I’ve listed two players for one starting slot where a positional battle appears to be taking shape or two players will likely be sharing minutes evenly.
Off we go . . .
1. Purdue
- Departing players: Martin (transfer), Crump
- Projected lineup: Kramer, Moore, Grant, Hummel, Calasan/Johnson
- Comment: Have to make them favorites with their entire starting lineup back and their steady improvement over the past season, but will conference opponents adjust to their smaller lineup the second time around?
2. Wisconsin
- Departing players: Flowers, Butch, Stiemsma
- Projected lineup: Hughes, Bohannon, Krabbenhoft, Landry, Jared Berggren
- Comment: They lose their two best players, but I simply refuse to drop them any lower than #2 based on their history of never missing a beat after star players graduate. And it appears Ryan has already stocked his cupboards with talent for the next three years.
3. Michigan State
- Departing players: Neitzel, Naymick
- Projected lineup: Lucas, Walton/Allen, Morgan, Roe, Suton
- Comment: Best team on paper again; can the team play consistently enough to leapfrog Purdue and Wisconsin? Discuss.
4. Ohio State
- Departing players: Butler, Hunter, Koufos (early entry), Terwilliger
- Projected lineup: Anthony Crater/Jeremie Simmons, Turner, Diebler, Lighty, B.J. Mullens
- Comment: Plenty of talent for next season, with another top-notch recruiting class and some juco help. Matta has shown the ability to mesh talent quickly; replacing Butler’s leadership at point guard is the big challenge.
5. Minnesota
- Departing players: Coleman, McKenzie, Tollackson
- Projected lineup: Nolen, Westbrook, Hoffarber/Devoe Joseph, Johnson, Ralph Sampson
- Comment: Tubby has definitely raised their recruiting profile; will the new guys be a better fit for Tubby’s system and move them above .500 in conference play?
6. Illinois
- Departing players: Pruitt, Randle, Alexander (transfer)
- Projected lineup: McCamey, Meacham, Alex Legion/Jamar Smith, Tisdale, Stan Simpson
- Comment: A decent bet to move back up the standings based on their efficiency numbers. Legion and Smith will be counted on to return Illinois to a productive offensive team; there’s not a lot on the front line to fill Pruitt’s shoes. Looks like Weber will be reloading the next few years, though.
7. Michigan
- Departing players: Udoh (transfer), Coleman
- Projected lineup: Grady, Harris, Wright, Sims, Gibson
- Comment: They’ll have a pretty well-rounded starting lineup and a year of Beilein’s system under their belt, but the loss of Udoh makes them paper thin up front.
8. Penn State
- Departing players: Claxton, Walker, Hassell
- Projected lineup: Battle, Pringle/Morissey, Jackson, Cornley, Jones
- Comment: Are their returning players better than Indiana and Iowa’s new players? They’re likely to improve on offense as their young players continue to develop, but the numbers don’t point to any improvement at all on defense.
9. Iowa
- Departing players: Freeman (transfer), Johnson, Gorney, Loobey
- Projected lineup: Peterson, Matt Gatens, Kelly, Tate, Cole
- Comment: Influx of six new players, including two juco players; yet another team that looks a little thin up front.
10. Indiana
- Departing players: Gordon (early entry), D.J. White, Ellis (dismissal/transfer), Bassett (dismissal/transfer), Stemler, Mike White, Thomas (dismissal/transfer), Holman (transfer)
- Projected lineup: Devon Dumes, Nick Williams, Crawford, Taber, Tom Pritchard
- Comment: Jordan Crawford becomes their likely go-to scorer. Crean has found some perimeter players that should be able to contribute right away; but Pritchard (a high school teammate of Delvon Roe) will have to bear a very large burden up front for a fairly unheralded incoming freshman.
11. Northwestern
- Departing players: Okrzesik
- Projected lineup: Thompson, Moore, Williams, Ryan, Coble
- Comment: The good news is they’re losing less than 10% of minutes played from this season; the bad news is these are the same players that went 1-17 in the conference this season.
Conclusion: Three teams look like NCAA Tournament locks at this point, with Ohio State a good bet to join them. Minnesota and Illinois are the two other teams that appear to have enough pieces in place to potentially make the jump to the Big Dance. The bottom of the conference looks weaker than it might have a month ago, with the departures of Udoh and Freeman and the exodus of players from Blomington.
A lack of front-line depth is evident across the conference. Maybe, just maybe, Suton and Roe can take advantage of this by scoring consistently down low, thereby stabilizing MSU’s offensive performance.
A very accurate assessment. I know most Purdue fans are thinking Big Ten title or bust, and some publications have had us as high as top 5 nationally. I think that’s awfully high, but if JuJuan Johnson and Nemanja Calasan get better we suddenly have some size too.
Lewis Jackson is supposed to be our answer as a true point guard as well, but he is just a true freshman.
Nicely done. I almost entirely agree with you, but I do think it’ll have to be Matta’s coaching genius that gets the Buckeyes to the Big Dance, I just don’t see a cohesive team with that roster.
Also, I think you under-rate your Spartans. Not that I blame you, but last season Kalin Lucas was clearly your point guard for the future, and you return your two best players in Suton & Morgan. I bet replacing Drew Naymick’s presence will be a bigger question for MSU than replacing Nietzel, unless Marquise Gray finally, finally steps up.
I honestly do not see Purdue acheiving more than they did last year! Teams will figure out how to stop the hummel craft, and they have little post action. And wisconsin….wow…i dont even want to talk about Bo Ryan aka(sleezy used car salesman). I just dont see how you lose two seniors out of your frontcourt, and your best perimeter defender, and are slated to finish second!? Im not arguing Bo’s ability to wheel n deal…but thats a lot to rebuild…im mean whos theyre replacement for Butch(not that he was amazing anyway)? Gavinski i think! Lol..ok. Heres my pics..
1. MSU-reason- they get better at PG. Everyone comes back..except Naymick..you add Roe to the mid/frontcourt. KNOCKS- shooting…if MSU can shoot a higher percentage from mid to threepoint range than they will be tough to stop.
2.Purdue-reason- Painter has just put the finishing touches on Duke north!
3.OSU-reason- I almost picked the bucks 2nd but Matta just had to much leavin columbus. But what they have coming in is why they are 3rd!
4. Wisconsin-reason- Bo Ryan will somehow get his reserves from last year accustomed to playing his “systematic” bigten style of play, and will win some games. I just do not see enough talent/experience to crack the top 2.
5.Minnesota- reason- A pretty good recruiting class for Tub coming in. Still young and might take a month to settle in.
6.Illinois-reason- could be 5th but i am not quite sold on Weber yet! What has he done since Self’s players?? Anyone? What a difference a coach can make!
7.Michigan-reason- If Epke would have stuck around I would be putting the wolverines neck and neck with the gophers. Now that hes gone it does indeed give them a very thin frontcourt! We will soon find out how good these leathal gaurds are that JB brought in. If they catch fire than UM could be a suprise!
8.Iowa-reason-todd lickliter
9.Penn State-reason- decent young player could leapfrog Iowa, but I just like Todds ability to extract talent.
10.IU-reason- hell on earth in Bloomington, IN. Give Crean about 3 years!
11.NW
oops forgot about Neitzel’s departure..so the spartans lose 2.
I know Northwestern is easy to ignore, and who cares whether you get things right about them anyway, but you need to revise you summary. Northwestern brings in perhaps its best recruiting class in history and one the better ones in the conference. The Cats add:
1. Kyle Rowley 7-0 280, who turned down offers from Wisconsin, Indiana and DePaul among others to sign with NU
2. Luka Mirkovic 6-10 225, ranked as the 4th best Indiana prospect by IndianaHoops, who received offers from Marquette, DePaul and allegedly Louisville among others
3. John Shurna 6-8 205, ranked as top 5 Illinois prospect by two Illinois recruiting gurus; first in slam dunk competition in big school divisiion; won sectional 3 pt competition hitting 13 of 15. Ranked in ESPN Top 150
4. Davide Curletti, 6-9 225 — ranked 9th best prospect in Michigan, 2nd team All State, ESPN ranks as 34th best center prospect in nation
5. Nick Fruent 6-5 — 1st team all state in Illinois and one of the leading scorers in the state since his freshman year; selected to attend NBA Camp for high school players last summer.
Nick Fruendt — 6-5 1st team all state Illinois
John Shurna — 6-8
We’ll take that under advisement, Mr. NU. I certainly hope the new guys help Carmody win some games next season. His style of basketball adds something unique to the conference. I’d hate to see him leave.
KJ, nice early preview of the conference. Purdue and Wisconsin are likely to be on top, and my Illini are likely to be somewhere in the middle of the pack.