Big 12 KenPom Rankings

2,976 Views | 25 Replies | Last: 10 mo ago by Crawfoso1973
DanaDane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:35p, 12/22/23
Bored this afternoon, so here it goes............

As the non-conference pretty much comes to a close over the next week, here are how the Big 12 teams look solely based on KenPom. These numbers will start changing at a more significant rate once Big 12 games and head-to-head action commences.

NOTE: There are 362 teams in D1.

OVERALL
1. Houston, 12-0 (#1 nationally)
2. BYU, 10-1 (#5)
3. Iowa St, 10-2 (#10)
4. Kansas, 10-1 (#13)
5. Baylor, 9-2 (#18)
6. Oklahoma, 10-1 (#22)
7. TCU, 9-1 (#33)
8. Texas, 8-2 (#35)
9. Cincinnati, 9-2 (#39)
10. Texas Tech, 9-2 (#45)
11. Kansas St, 9-3 (#67)
12. UCF, 8-3 (#79)
13. Oklahoma St, 6-5 (#93)
14. WVU, 4-7 (#136)

OFFENSE
1. Baylor (#4)
2. BYU (#15)
3. Houston (#16)
4. Texas (#25)
5. Kansas (#36)
6. Iowa St (#41)
7. TCU (#43)
8. Oklahoma (#45)
9. Cincinnati (#48)
10. Texas Tech (#65)
11. Kansas St (#105)
12. Oklahoma St (#143)
13. UCF (#157)
14. WVU (#183)


DEFENSE
1. Houston (#1)
2. Iowa St (#5)
3. Kansas (#6)
4. Oklahoma (#8)
5. BYU (#9)
6. UCF (#28)
7. TCU (#34)
8. Kansas St (#36)
9. Texas Tech (#41)
10. Cincinnati (#42)
11. Oklahoma St (#60)
12. Texas (#66)
13. Baylor (#68)
14. WVU (#116)

SCHEDULE STRENGTH THUS FAR
1. Kansas (#45)
2. Baylor (#75)
3. Kansas St (#97)
4. WVU (#117)
5. Houston (#190)
6. Texas Tech (#222)
7. Oklahoma (#279)
8. BYU (#287)
9. Oklahoma St (#291)
10. Cincinnati (#293)
11. Texas (#295)
12. UCF (#315)
13. Iowa St (#341)
14. TCU (#361)


Reply Quote
1 edit
IowaBear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:42p, 12/22/23
The SOS past BU is just ****ing embarrassing. Talk about fluffing your records
Reply Quote
7
DanaDane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to IowaBear • 2:45p, 12/22/23
IowaBear said:
The SOS past BU is just ****ing embarrassing. Talk about fluffing your records
Dixon, in particular, should wear a paper bag. Basketball schedules aren't made years in advance like football. He knew TCU was gonna projected easily as a top half Big 12 team this year and had lots of production returning. To schedule like he has is a complete embarrassment.
Reply Quote
5
IowaBear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DanaDane • 2:46p, 12/22/23
Him and Otz are just cowards. Jesus play someone… anyone with a pulse. There's zero excuses for those or Sampson and the Tx coach to be this wimpy. I'll excuse Cincy and UCF as they'll struggle to get W's in conference
Reply Quote
3
DanaDane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to IowaBear • 2:55p, 12/22/23
Kansas, Arizona, UH and BU, along with 1 or 2 others, will likely be the face of Big 12 basketball starting next year. KU, Arizona and Drew already schedule several high profile games. Yormark needs to get in Kelvin's ear and remind him they need to pull their weight too. UH is too big of a basketball brand to be playing an overall weak schedule.
Reply Quote
3
TWD 1974
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DanaDane • 3:40p, 12/22/23
DanaDane said:
IowaBear said:
The SOS past BU is just ****ing embarrassing. Talk about fluffing your records
Dixon, in particular, should wear a paper bag. Basketball schedules aren't made years in advance like football. He knew TCU was gonna projected easily as a top half Big 12 team this year and had lots of production returning. To schedule like he has is a complete embarrassment.
TCU's 361 in strength of schedule is out of 362 teams rated. The only team with a weaker schedule is Longwood--who, interestingly, is expected to make the NCAA from their conference. Used to think a 10-8 Big 12 conference record should be a lock for NCAA. Not sure that will work for froggie.
Reply Quote
3
DanaDane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TWD 1974 • 3:51p, 12/22/23
I think that's precisely why most of the projections now have them in 1st 4 Out position for the tournament. I don't see how they would get in without a winning conference record, and if it is only 10-8 they may have to win a game or two in the conference tournament.
Reply Quote
3
Big_Pumpin
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:44p, 12/22/23
LJ cryer starting for the top defensive team in the nation. Interesting.
Reply Quote
3
WA Jim
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Big_Pumpin • 11:24a, 12/23/23
Big_Pumpin said:
LJ cryer starting for the top defensive team in the nation. Interesting.
That is interesting. I'm starting to wonder if we are really effective at coaching defense….
Reply Quote
1
BigGameBaylorBear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:38p, 12/23/23
*sigh* another high ranked offense with abysmal defense kind of year? Those can only go so far in March

Drew needs to bring someone on staff to fix the D because it hasn't been the same since Tang left
Reply Quote
4
blackie
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:55p, 12/23/23
I don't think the defense is "abysmal". Not what you want, but I think that is a little harsh. From what I have watched it seems to be better than last year.
Reply Quote
2
Stefano DiMera
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TWD 1974 • 5:58p, 12/23/23
10-8 would definitely get them in.

Hell 7-11 would get them in if those 7 are all Quad 1 wins which 90% of this league would be if you beat someone.
Reply Quote
Stefano DiMera
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to blackie • 6:00p, 12/23/23
Yes. Missi is an upgrade automatically.
Reply Quote
1
DanaDane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:44p, 12/23/23
First, let me state I have always been a huge Jerome Tang fan and always will be. He was a huge part of championship winning team and everything Drew has built. And I'm not posting this to argue with anyone. I was just curious because I often have a difficult time separating anecdotal feelings from hardcore statistics.

So, I thought I'd go back and look at the numbers starting in 2013 (and I only chose that because it was as far as my laptop screen went with the data without my paginating - no other reason), here are the following defensive rankings for Baylor:

2013 - #62
2014 - #70
2015 - #23
2016 - #84
2017 - #16
2018 - #23
2019 - #75
2020 - #4
2021 - #22 (National Champs)
2022 - #13
2023 - #107
2024 - #69 (as of today)

Tang was here from the beginning of this data through 2022. As you can see, we had several years with defensive rankings similar to what we have now so it's not like we were always a defensive juggernaut every season when Tang was here. The inconsistencies in the trend line would lead me more to believe it was a product of the types of players we had, since I don't think Tang's or Drew's or other staff member had a yo-yo teaching effect like that every year.

In particular, the 2020-22 three season data would seem to be more reflective of the fact we hit a gold mine in recruting/redshirting/playing time with each other and found players with better defensive fundamentals than what we may have now. The coaching of Drew, Tang, Mills and others obviously had an effect. But maybe our bigger challenge is just that the recruiting mixes we have the past two years just aren't as good at D. It certainly doesn't absolve the coaching staff for figuring out how to adjust for those deficiencies as much as possible and continue teaching. But it may not be singular fix by thinking the insertion of Tang would suddenly change all of it.
Reply Quote
7
Limited IQ Redneck in PU
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DanaDane • 7:23p, 12/23/23
DanaDane said:
First, let me state I have always been a huge Jerome Tang fan and always will be. He was a huge part of championship winning team and everything Drew has built. And I'm not posting this to argue with anyone. I was just curious because I often have a difficult time separating anecdotal feelings from hardcore statistics.

So, I thought I'd go back and look at the numbers starting in 2013 (and I only chose that because it was as far as my laptop screen went with the data without my paginating - no other reason), here are the following defensive rankings for Baylor:

2013 - #62
2014 - #70
2015 - #23
2016 - #84
2017 - #16
2018 - #23
2019 - #75
2020 - #4
2021 - #22 (National Champs)
2022 - #13
2023 - #107
2024 - #69 (as of today)

Tang was here from the beginning of this data through 2022. As you can see, we had several years with defensive rankings similar to what we have now so it's not like we were always a defensive juggernaut every season when Tang was here. The inconsistencies in the trend line would lead me more to believe it was a product of the types of players we had, since I don't think Tang's or Drew's or other staff member had a yo-yo teaching effect like that every year.

In particular, the 2020-22 three season data would seem to be more reflective of the fact we hit a gold mine in recruting/redshirting/playing time with each other and found players with better defensive fundamentals than what we may have now. The coaching of Drew, Tang, Mills and others obviously had an effect. But maybe our bigger challenge is just that the recruiting mixes we have the past two years just aren't as good at D. It certainly doesn't absolve the coaching staff for figuring out how to adjust for those deficiencies as much as possible and continue teaching. But it may not be singular fix by thinking the insertion of Tang would suddenly change all of it.


Thank you for the well informed factual based comment sir
I have found theres only two ways to go:
Living fast or dying slow.
I dont want to live forever.
But I will live while I'm here.
Reply Quote
2
TWD 1974
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DanaDane • 7:52p, 12/23/23
DanaDane said:
First, let me state I have always been a huge Jerome Tang fan and always will be. He was a huge part of championship winning team and everything Drew has built. And I'm not posting this to argue with anyone. I was just curious because I often have a difficult time separating anecdotal feelings from hardcore statistics.

So, I thought I'd go back and look at the numbers starting in 2013 (and I only chose that because it was as far as my laptop screen went with the data without my paginating - no other reason), here are the following defensive rankings for Baylor:

2013 - #62
2014 - #70
2015 - #23
2016 - #84
2017 - #16
2018 - #23
2019 - #75
2020 - #4
2021 - #22 (National Champs)
2022 - #13
2023 - #107
2024 - #69 (as of today)

Tang was here from the beginning of this data through 2022. As you can see, we had several years with defensive rankings similar to what we have now so it's not like we were always a defensive juggernaut every season when Tang was here. The inconsistencies in the trend line would lead me more to believe it was a product of the types of players we had, since I don't think Tang's or Drew's or other staff member had a yo-yo teaching effect like that every year.

In particular, the 2020-22 three season data would seem to be more reflective of the fact we hit a gold mine in recruting/redshirting/playing time with each other and found players with better defensive fundamentals than what we may have now. The coaching of Drew, Tang, Mills and others obviously had an effect. But maybe our bigger challenge is just that the recruiting mixes we have the past two years just aren't as good at D. It certainly doesn't absolve the coaching staff for figuring out how to adjust for those deficiencies as much as possible and continue teaching. But it may not be singular fix by thinking the insertion of Tang would suddenly change all of it.
Thanks for the data! One question: when did we go from the zone to the no middle? 2014?
I was surprised to see we had a higher defensive rating the year after the Championship, but then remember that defense before the injuries... having KB and Sochan/Mayer and that length at the perimeter was amazing. Losing Tang has been a challenge undoubtedly--in all manner of aspects-- but his departure isn't the whole story any more than our bad defense last year was solely the fault of Keyonte (as many on this board argued), or, later, when he entered the portal, it was about LJ.

Last point I would make is sometimes, when you are struggling on d, the best remedy is making shots on the other end. Even if you have a mediocre defense, get a bucket and get back, eliminate the transition points, making it a half-court game, will make your defense better % wise. At least, that's the plan... This offense is good enough to keep us in the game against anyone--if we can eliminate the breakdown, we had at MSU, or stop moving the ball like we did the last 5 minutes at Duke.
Reply Quote
2
MrGolfguy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to IowaBear • 10:35p, 12/23/23
IowaBear said:
The SOS past BU is just ****ing embarrassing. Talk about fluffing your records
Tcu at #361, what? Have they been playing the Fort Worth high schools?
Reply Quote
2
Crawfoso1973
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DanaDane • 4:32a, 12/24/23
Excellent stats and analysis!
Reply Quote
1
Quinton
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to DanaDane • 8:31a, 12/24/23
He loves those efficiency metrics. You can't juice them as well going up against multiple high caliber opponents, even with the supposed adjustment for caliber of opponent.
Reply Quote
Quinton
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to TWD 1974 • 8:46a, 12/24/23
The defensive mix of young George and Cryer with nobody in the front court was bad. Flag was passable but lacked athleticism to make up for the others. Love couldn't move off the injury.

But this year there are more than enough raw pieces to put together a competent defense. The guards are much longer, they are more athletic, along with Bridges/Missi is more than enough to no be in the 70s.

The staff should be able to figure it out and they might. It's not a knock to consider bringing in a defensive specialist on staff. The guys we have are really good skill teachers and recruiters. But it's clear something is missing on defense. We are not defensively responsible and our footwork/fundamentals are off. Over pursuit and lack of communication that lead to botched screen coverage and rotations are recurring issues
Reply Quote
3
Crawfoso1973
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Quinton • 10:08a, 12/24/23
Couldn't agree more with your comments on over-pursuit and poor angles. Walter and Nunn in particular keep getting beat over and over again due to playing poor angles and up on their man too close. No reason for this because both are capable of being above average to excellent on-ball defenders and have shown their defensive potential in spurts. And they are gritty, tough players so there's no lack of effort or buy-in. It's honestly perplexing.
Reply Quote
2
Quinton
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Crawfoso1973 • 10:20a, 12/24/23
100% Said it perfectly. It makes 0 sense. Nunn and Walter would be the most or second most athletic guards on Houston, iowa st, or Tn. Again, no sense.
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
BearlyNose
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:47a, 12/24/23
Take a look at the footwork of the women's team when on defense vs. the footwork of the men's team when playing defense. Or take a look at Michigan's State defense vs.our defense. Both examples vs. our men's team are examples of great teaching/learning and skill sets something most of our men are lacking. I agree that offense may keep us in a game, but improving our defensive posture will improve our results when the going gets tough.
Reply Quote
1 edit
GoodOleBaylorLine
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MrGolfguy • 1:27p, 12/27/23
MrGolfguy said:
IowaBear said:
The SOS past BU is just ****ing embarrassing. Talk about fluffing your records
Tcu at #361, what? Have they been playing the Fort Worth high schools?
As if. North Crowley would be an upgrade in SOS.
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
cwpayton
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
4:17p, 12/27/23
Our interior defense is not good. Thank goodness for Missi being great at shot blocking and yes, he is definitely headed to the NBA with Walter next year. I don't blame him as the NBA is not kind to seasoned college players.

Ojianwuna has so far not developed like past Baylor players and looks about the same as he did last year.

Lohner has made a few better plays this year, but he should not be allowed to take shots more than 2 inches from the rim.

JTT continues to have great energy, almost too much and really needs to play a little more in control. I think he and Missi's development is the key to this year's team, unless Bridges decides to play low more.

Nunn looks great as long as we aren't playing anyone good.

Bridges, Walters I think are fine. Bridges is probably our most consistent player and Walters will continue to improve.

Langston Love I think needs more time. RayJ has 44 turnovers so far this season. The next highest is Nunn with 21. I think Love needs to get called on more. He's a little erratic but I think he needs more of a chance to shine.

Overall, I enjoy watching this team so much more than last year's team. But watching how easy it is for teams to get inside on us starts making the watching painful.

Drew needs to find someone to coach Defense. That's the bottom line.

Grant McCasland KenPom Defense rank:

2022 - 22
2023 - 18
2024 - 40 (Texas Tech)

Jerome Tang, last 2 years with Kansas State
2023 - 27
2024 - 33

Baylor
2023 - 107
2024 - 70

The highest any national championship team has had was us in 2021 with a ranking of 22. Most of the time teams that win are 15 or much lower.

My class graduation rank was embarrassing at Baylor in 1990 but even I can see what is going on here with those numbers. Drew's coaching tree is impressive, so who's next? Clearly not Brooks or Jakus. CSD needs someone new.
Reply Quote
Crawfoso1973
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to cwpayton • 5:05a, 12/28/23
Our struggles defensively are due to personnel moreso than coaching. Our decline the past 2 seasons is due to losing elite defenders like Davion, Vital, Teague, EJ, Butler, Sochan while replacing them with bad to not-so-great defenders. I agree Drew might need another voice to help our team with defensive fundamentals. But a coach won't magically turn bad defensive players into great defensive players. Any more than a coach can magically turn a bad offensive player into a great offensive player.
Reply Quote
1
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.