That's the one thing we will improve upon without Lipsey is outside shooting. He did everything great but that and when games matter it becomes a huge weakness to have a guard on the court that can't shoot.
2026-2027 MBB computer projections thread
- Thread starter Sigmapolis
- Start date
About is good is accurate from a wins perspective. I don't see the 2 seed top 10 all year season like 2025-26 but 2026-27 should be top 20ish all year and 4-5 seed.
Think they get the results in different ways though. While last year was great offensively and very good defensively next years team could be elite defensively and good offensively. I do wonder if ISU starts a bit slow as the new player adjust to their roles and gain confidence thus entering the tourney they are "peaking" for a deep run. Having a bit more depth will allow the coaches to mix rotations to get the best combination of minutes to optimize the players skills after some games.
Very curious if Singleton can replicate the projection JJ had his first year coming off the knee injury. Don't think that is out side the range of expectations having a fully season starting in the Big10 which wasn't something Jefferson had.
Lipsey and Milan were great players for us for multiple years. But they were also a little bit unique and somewhat limited in their skillsets. They were elite in some areas and average at others for their position (rebounding and defense for Milan and 3pt and FT shooting for Tamin). Not to say they will be easy to replace, but a more well rounded player that is very good in areas, without needing to be elite, can have a similar impact.
The loss of Jefferson is what probably lowers the ceiling on next years team compared to last year (the ceiling on last years team was at least Final 4 so its a really high bar).
The loss of Jefferson is what probably lowers the ceiling on next years team compared to last year (the ceiling on last years team was at least Final 4 so its a really high bar).
That's assuming Toure improves his 3-pt shot, which I assume he will with another off-season in which to practice it. Liipsey and Toure shot the same 3-pt % last year.
Good hunch. But I expected that before probably four of the five Otz seasons, and several of those rolled to unexpected fast starts.
If a slower start correlated directly with a better tournament run, I'm sure we'd all accept the swap, but of course it doesn't work that way.
Being a Monday morning QB, wish TJ would play more people up until the NCAA tournament. He sticks to 8-9 guys. We have generally faded going into the Tournament and have had some late season injuries. The injuries likely are unavoidable but seems to be a recurring pattern with us with a late season injury to a starter.
Now that practices have started, could someone explain the T-Rank projections to me? For example, Nebraska is projected to be the 13th best team in the country (?, maybe I'm misinterpreting), and while they return two of their three leading scorers, guard and post play are major question marks. kind of important. Then you have Kansas, projected 9th and plenty talented, but whose roster has very little experience. Data people are smart, so I'm guessing Torvik makes no bones about the flaws of projections? Because even if all the data is reasonably predictive, it's definitionally impossible to "scale" it for Kansas' Toledo transfer, or darn near all of Iowa State's roster, until conference play has started
https://adamcwisports.blogspot.com/p/every-possession-counts.html read his explanations here on what T-Rank is. Really it is a prediction of offensive efficiency with defensive efficiency being more closely tied to program history (ISU very good on D almost every year will likely be good on D again regardless of personnel).
KU has a mix of highly regarded freshmen that his model assumes will be good players based on their recruit ranking and experienced transfers who have had some measure of success in CBB. Nebraska has some big time offensive pieces coming back and I'm guessing based on the past few years his model assumes good defense again. Obviously projecting how a transfer will perform after moving up a level is very difficult, so its not going to be on the money for every player
I know we associated Fredball with elite offenses and mediocre defenses.
Which was true during his era in Ames.
Offense data/ranking and defensive data/ranking are on the far right.
Fredball at Nebraska is actually somehow... defense-first not offense-first lately.
#53 offense and #8 defense
Somewhat comparable to some of the earlier TJ teams before Gilbert, Jones, and Jefferson showed up.
Loenser was a life raft for Hoiberg. Not that Fred was in imminent danger of being fired—expectations for Nebraska basketball aren't...well, there almost aren't any—but ~three more seasons of missing the tournament or not breaking the streak would've had fans apathetic, even if not angry. Now, whereas Otz has already proven he can recruit for his system and slot just about anyone in, this is the first season Hoiberg will have to back up success, and as things stand I don't see their roster being as good defensively. I suppose some of that depends on how good or bad other defenses across the country are, which is part of why I'm not in love with preseason projections in the unrestricted-transfer-portal era. But who knows
It's absurd to me that a TJ team has yet to have a worse than 10 ranked defense. Insanely consistent while changing players drastically each year.
Just highlights the importance of getting the "right" players rather than the "best" players.
