Wednesday, October 30, 2019

2019-2020 Season Preview: Gopher Men

You probably don’t recall that I picked the Gopher men to finish 8th in the Big 10 at 9-11. Like the women (who I picked 7th at 9-9), I thought that was a little generous. But unlike the women, who are getting some pretty favorable reviews elsewhere, most prognosticators appear to agree with me (when I say I’m being generous), but really disagreeing with me, I should say, because everybody else has got the Gopher men more like 9th through 13th in the Big 10. The official pre-season media poll has them 11th.

Well, it all depends, of course. Doesn’t everybody’s prospect just depend on something. In this case, it all depends on whether the 3 transfers are that good or not, and whether their chemistry among themselves and with the Gophers big 2 returnees is good.

So here’s what we know.

• Daniel Oturu is a horse. He scored 11 ppg with 7 boards and a block and 55% shooting as a freshman. Now, it’s going to get tougher for him with Jordan Murphy gone. Now, he’ll be the #1 focus of the inside defenses. But he’s a year older and wiser and stronger and even with defenses hanging all over him, he’ll at least match last year’s numbers. I have him on my 2nd all-Big 10 team, though I’ll admit that might be a little generous, too. But, he will be among the top “bigs.” He’ll have good nights and he’ll probably have some nights that aren’t so good. It says here he’ll break even against the other top 7 bigs and win the post matchup against the other 7. 

• Gabe Kalscheur is also an all-Big 10 prospect. He just needs to develop a little more consistency with his shot. He made 42% last year, 41% of 3s. That’s not quite enough daggers yet, but I think he’ll get there. He scored something like 77 points in the 2 all-star games at the end of his senior season, and I said that someday he would do that in the Big 10. Yes, 77 points in 2 games. Not every night, but someday, once. But, right now he is probably a breakeven catch-and-shooter in the Big 10. Half the teams have somebody better, the rest have somebody almost as good.

• Among the other 4 returnees, Michael Hurt is a good, skilled player off the bench. He’s not that big and he’s not that strong, but he is smart, he can pass the ball. He doesn’t hurt you, but he’s not a difference-maker. 

• Jarvis Omersa might contribute someday. Brady Rudrud and Hunt Conroy go hard in practice. 

And here’s what we don’t know.

• A lot is expected of Marcus Carr, the 6-2 sophomore point guard transfer from Pitt. He scored 10 as a freshman in the Big East and led the Panthers with 4 assists per night. You might be surprised to know he scored 9 ppg as a senior in high school. He seemed pretty solid against Southwest State but, hey, are you going to make me say it? Still, 6 assists is a nice start.

• A lot is expected of Payton Willis, the 6-4 junior transfer from Vanderbilt. He scored 5 ppg at Vandy, but 16 as a senior in high school and he was rated as the #22 point guard in his class. People don’t seem to be as high on him as on Carr, and Carr did outscore him 2 years ago 10-5. But against Southwest State, he was better than Carr, scoring 14 points (vs. 12 for Carr) on 2 fewer shots, and he matched Carr’s 6 assists. OK, it’s just one game and, well, you know. Still, he looked good.

• Not so much is expected of Alihan Demir, the 6-9 senior transfer from Drexel, where he went 15-6-3 last year. But, well, you know, don’t make me say it. He struggled against Southwest State. Hey, it’s just one game.

• More is expected of Isaiah Ihnen, the 6-9 freshman from Germany. Even this year, with Ihnen being a good 3 years younger than Demir, more is expected of Ihnen than Demir. But, first, hopefully, he’s going to bounce back from a hand injury really quickly and start getting some game experience at this level, even, well, you know, don’t make me say it.

• And then there’s the 6-5 freshman guard Tre Williams, who like Ihnen is rated a 4-star recruit. He looked pretty good against, well, you know, with 9 points, 6 boards and 2 steals. And, also, 6-0 freshman guard Bryan Greenlee, a 3-star recruit who went 14-4-7-2 as a senior in high school. He also looked OK against Southwest State but, well, you know. The other freshman is 6-10 post Sam Freeman. This is only Sam’s 3rd year of competitive basketball. He is a project, and he is not going to contribute this year.

But, seriously, what we really don’t know is how good Carr, Willis and Demir really are. The Gophers return a measly 24 ppg from last year. Carr, Willis and Demir represent 30 points from their last college seasons. We think we know that Demir’s 15 ppg at Drexel needs a discount. We’re not sure about Carr and Willis’ 15. I’m thinking no discount, that they’ll do that and better. If not, well, the Gophers will be in trouble.

So the depth chart looks like this.


Center

Forward

Point Guard

Combo Guard

Shooting Guard

Oturu

Ihnen

Carr

Willis

Kalscheur

Alihan

Hurt

Willis

Williams

Williams



Omersa

Greenlee



The biggest question mark is Ihnen. We haven’t seen him yet. Is he really the Gophers 5th best player? If not, then Alihan or Hurt or Omersa will have to start, or coach Rick Pitino is looking at a 4-out with Carr, Willis, Williams and Kalscheur, and then there’s almost nobody to come off the bench on the perimeter. So I’d be pretty sure that coach is looking to keep a couple of bigs on the court most of the time. But, it one of them ain’t Ihnen, I don’t know who it is.

But if Ihnen is 2/3 to ¾ as good as Oturu was as a freshman, and if I’m right about Carr and Willis (scoring more than 15 between them), then this is not a bad team. If the top 5 in my depth chart are “not bad,” well, there’s also a little bit of depth behind them. But if Ihnen and Carr and Willis are not all pretty darn competitive Big 10 players, then this will indeed be a long year. 

I had them 8th at 9-11. If the Gophers have nothing but good luck from here on out, then 10-10. But, again, if the 3 newcomers are not competitive, 6-12 and 5-13 are not out of the question. And, about that point, we just don’t know yet. 

Tuesday, October 22, 2019

2019-2020 Season Preview: Big Ten Women

Big 10 women’s basketball consists of a 6 haves and 8 have-nots.

School
Regular Season Titles
Outright-Tied
Tournament Titles
NCAA Final/ Comment

The Haves

Ohio State

15

8-7

5

Lost 1993

Purdue

7

4-3

9

Won 1999 Lost 2001

Iowa

9

4-5

3



Penn State—joined Big 10 in 1993

8

5-3

2

But not a Have since Rene Portland retirement

Maryland—joined in 2014

4

2-2

3

Won 2006 

Michigan State

4

1-3

1

Lost 2005

The Have Nots

Indiana

1

0-1

1


Nebraska—joined in 2011

0

0-0

1



Northwestern

1

0-1



Rutgers—joined in 2014

0

0-0

0

Lost 2007; really a Have, just not since joining the Big 10

Michigan

0

0-0

0


Minnesota

0

0-0

0


Wisconsin

0

0-0

0


There is of course variability. Even the Haves have off years. 

And Penn State and Rutgers status is a little big misleading. Penn State was a powerhouse under coach Rene Portland from 1980 through 2007, winning 606 games, playing in 21 NCAA tournaments and winning 15 Atlantic 10 championships. In 1986, Portland went on record that she did not recruit and would not allow lesbians to play on her team. Penn State adopted an anti-discrimination policy in 1991 but, hey, Portland was winning. But 46 percent of her players over those 27 years did not complete their eligibility. Portland was sued in 2006, won 28 and lost 32 games in 2006 and 2007, her only losing seasons, then resigned. Portland won three-quarters of her conference games. Her successor, Coquese Washington, won less than half. So, the point is that Penn State’s overall record makes them a Have, but their recent performance does not. 

Rutgers, meanwhile, played in 23 NCAA tournaments in 27 years and has played in 2 in 6 years since joining the Big 10. They won 17 conference championships—regular season and/or playoff—in 23 years in Atlantic 10, but have not won any conference championship in the Big 10. Their Big 10 record makes them a have-not, but their overall record would make them a Have. 

Last year, the Haves (here, I am including Rutgers and not including Penn State) went 69-39 in the conference, and Iowa and Maryland played in the tournament final. The Have-Nots 54-90. In 6 tournament games matching Haves vs. Have-Nots, the Haves won 5 and lost 1. (#13 Wisconsin shocked #5 Ohio State 73-63.)

So all of that is background. The questions here, then, are: Which of the haves will stumble? Which of the Have-Nots will rise up? Last year Michigan State went 9-9 and Purdue 8-10, while Michigan went 11-7, while Minnesota, Nebraska and Northwestern also went 9-9. 

The Haves

It would be a very unusual year if a Have did not win the regular season and tournament titles. Penn State won several over the years, but as we said, they weren’t really a Have Not until just recently. Otherwise a Have-Not has not won a regular season title since Illinois in 1997. Nebraska won a tournament title in 2014 and Indiana in 2002.

1. Maryland Last year 15-3, 29-5

Maryland should easily repeat as Big 10 regular season champion and should improve on last year’s runner-ups in the tournament. Coach Brenda Freese lost only Brianna Fraser (7 ppg) and returns Kaila Charles (6-1, sr., G, 17 ppg, 49% shooting), Stephanie Jones (6-2, sr., F, 13 ppg, 59%) and Taylor Mikesell (5-11, soph., G, 13 ppg), plus Shakira Austin (6-5, soph., C) and her 9 boards, and 3 other experienced hands. She can go 8 deep with players who played 10 minutes or more last year. 

Their line is: 66 ppg returning-32 rebounds-15 assists-46% shooting as a group-37 minutes returning.

Again, this is returning from a 29-5 group. However, the Terrapins didn’t finish strong, losing to Iowa in the conference tournament and to #6 seed UCLA in the NCAA 2nd round.

2. Michigan State 9-9, 21-12 

Michigan State and Purdue are Haves though both stumbled a little bit last year. But, both at least won 1st round games in the conference tournament. But Michigan State returns 3 double digit scorers and 7 double digit minutes performers. They’ve got 3 experienced guards, each of whom averaged 4 assists—5-8 sophomore Nia Clouden (12 ppg, 44%), 5-9 senior Shay Colloy (14 ppg, 37%) and 5-5 senior Taryn McCutcheon (10 ppg, 35%). You’ll note the shooting percentages, however, and hope that the four returning 6-footers, who include Minnesotan Nia Hollie, who shot 48 percent among them, take more of the shots this year.

Jenny Allen and Sidney Cooks and their 21 ppg are gone.

Their line is 56 ppg-25 rebounds-17 assists-44%-32 minutes

3. Purdue 8-10, 19-15

Purdue, meanwhile, lost nobody, and also has 3 double digit scorers and 7 double digit minutes performers back. Guards Karissa McLoughlin (5-7, Jr., 15 ppg, 40%) and Dominique Oden (4-8, Sr., 14 ppg, 43%) are probably a little better shooters than the Spartans guards, but after Ae’Rianna Harris (6-1, Sr., F, 13 ppg. 9 reb, 49%), their bigs (and, for that matter, the entire rest of their roster) do not shoot well at all. So they’ll rely on their big 3 more than Michigan State will have to do. The shooting percentage is their main challenge. McLoughlin and Oden were #1 and #2 in the Big 10 in minutes, which may not be a good sign but, on the other hand, they’re accustomed to the pressure.

Their line is 63 ppg-29 rebounds-14 assists-37%-37 minutes

4. Ohio State 10-8, 14-15

Ohio State continues to rebuild under Kevin McGuff, who seems finally to have hit paydirt with one of the nation’s top recruiting classes led by Canton, OH, already 2-time Ms. Basketball, Kierstin Bell. There are 5 top 60s and 2 international players coming in and I think they’ll outscore the returnees. Still, the returnees are 6-4, 6-3, 6-1, 5-10, and, well, 3 of the 4 shoot it pretty well.

Their line is 30 ppg-17 rebounds-4 assists-44%-16 minutes

But that’s not as big of a deal as it is with everybody else. Nobody else has newcomers like this.

5. Iowa 14-4, 29-7

The Hawkeyes lose national Player of the Year Megan Gustafson. If you saw them last year, you know that everybody else was competent but not a lot more than that. And, they also lost 2 starting guards.

Guards Mackenzie Meyer (5-9, Sr., 9 ppg, 6 assists, 42%) and Kathleen Doyle (5-9, Sr., 12 ppg, 6 assists, 40%) will have to lead the way. It’s also time for the once-highly regarded Amanda Ollinger (6-1, Sr., F, 2 ppg, 47%) to step up. Minnesota Monika Czinano (6-3, Soph., C, 2 ppg, 55%) also figures to start.

Their line is 31 ppg-12 rebounds-15 assists-43%-20 minutes

6. Rutgers 13-5, 22-10

Rutgers loses a lot—4 players who played 116 minutes among them and scored 33 ppg—and they return 4 players who played 74 minutes and scored 26 ppg. And, they’re not as big as most of the teams listed above. 5-11 junior guard Arella Guarantes (12 ppg, 52%) will have to be huge.

Their line is 26 ppg-9 rebounds-5 assists-46%-15 minutes

The Have-Nots

1. Indiana 8-10, 21-13

If there’s a breakout, it will probably be the Hosers. They return guards Ali Patberg and Jaelynn Penn, both juniors , both 5-10, 5-11, who scored 30 between them with 9 boards and 6 assists while shooting 44% and 40%, respectively. Patberg was #3 in the conference in minutes. Breanna Wise (6-0, Sr., F, 12 ppg, 7 reb, 44%) is the top returnee inside. 

Their line is 62 ppg-27 rebounds-11 assists-41%-33 minutes

That’s a lot of experience but the shooting percentages and the 8-10 record say they’re not a shoo-in.

2. Michigan 11-7, 22-12

Last year was a breakout for the Wolverines but they lose Hallie Thome, Nicole Munger and Deja Church and their 31 ppg and a lot of ball-handling. But, they’re big, led by 6-2 sophomore forward Naz Hillmon (13 ppg-7 reb-63%) and 6-0 sophomore guard Amy Dilk (7 ppg-4 reb-3 asts, 39%). Still, they don’t look like an 11-7 team again.

Their line is 40 ppg-20 rebounds-8 assists-46%-21 minutes

3. Minnesota 9-9, 21-11

We’ll look at the Gophers separately, but this at least says they’re competitive though the shooting percentage is a worry.

Their line is 53 ppg-24 rebounds-10 assists-40%-31 minutes

4. Northwestern 9-9, 21-15

For the Wildcats, this, too, is almost a breakthrough, and they only lost one key player. 5-10 junior guard Lindsay Pulliam (16 ppg-4 reb-2 asts-37%) leads the way with running mate Veronica Burton (5-9, Soph., 10 ppg, 41%). 6-2 senior center Abi Scheid (9 ppg-4 4 reb-3 ast-38%) has been injury-prone and her numbers last year were not as strong as her sophomore year. So she’ll be key. But, overall, they’re a bad shooting team.

Their line is 56 ppg-20 rebounds-14 assists-38%-37 minutes

5. Nebraska 9-9, 14-16

They’ll be led by guards Hannah Whitish, 3 point-shooting specialist; Minnesotan Sam Haiby (10 ppg as a freshman); and Nicea Eriely, 6-1 defensive specialist. They’re a good shooting team, so anything can happen.

Their line is 59 ppg-21 rebounds-1 assists-46%

6. Wisconsin 4-14, 15-18

They could be improved if they can shake the injury bug, especially Minnesotans Courtney Frederickson and Carmen Backes. Backes is a redshirt freshman who has yet to play for the Badgers. I still say she’s got a world of upside. But Imani Lewis (6-1, Soph., F, 12 ppg, 8 reb, 43%) should be their best player. They lost nobody, except to injury.

Their line is 43 ppg-22 rebounds-6 assists-39%-25 minutes

7. Penn State 5-13, 12-18

New coach, Minnesotan Carolyn Kieger, will have her hands full this year, losing Teriya Page and Amari Carter and their 30 ppg. Alisa Smith (6-3, Jr., F, 9 ppg, 7 reb, 46%) is a horse and 5-9 guard Siyah Frasier (Sr., 10 ppg, 5 reb, 2 asts, 45%) is solid but, after that, it’s hard to say.

Their line is 42 ppg-23 rebounds-4 assists-41%-24 minutes

8. Illinois 2-16, 10-20

The Illini are bad, which is precisely why their win over the Gophers was such a blight on Lindsay Whalen’s 1st season. Now, they lost their best player, Minnesotan Alex Wittinger, from a 2-16 team. Brandi Beasley (5-6, Sr., G, 12 ppg, 4 reb, 5 asts, 41%) is pretty much the show in Champagne. 

Their line is 35 ppg-16 rebounds-10 assists-42%-22 minutes

Big 10 Prediction

Combine the 2 lists and here’s what you get.

1. Maryland 17-1
2. Michigan State 14-4
3. Purdue 13-5
4. Indiana 12-6
5. Michigan 11-7
6. Ohio State 10-8
7. Minnesota 9-9
8. Iowa 8-10
9. Northwestern 8-10
10. Nebraska 8-10
11. Rutgers 7-11
12. Wisconsin 4-14
13. Penn State 3-15
14. Illinois 2-16

All-Big 10

Big—Taiye Bello, Minnesota, 6-2, Sr., 10 ppg, 12 reb, 53%
Big—Kaila Charles, Maryland, 6-1, Sr., 17 ppg, 7 reb, 49%
Wing—Stephanie Jones, Maryland, 6-2, Sr., 13 ppg, 6 reb, 59%
Point Guard—Ali Patberg, Indiana, 5-11, Jr., 16 ppg, 5 reb, 5 ast, 44%
Combo Guard—Karissa McLoughlin, Purdue, 5-7, Jr., 15 ppg, 3 reb, 4 ast, 40%

2nd Team

Big—Naz Hillmon, Michigan, 6-2, Soph., 13 ppg, 7 reb, 63%
Big—Ae’Rianna Harris, Purdue, 6-1, Sr., 13 ppg, 9 reb, 49%
Point Guard—Kathleen Doyle, Iowa, 5-9, Sr., 12 ppg, 3 reb, 6 asts, 40%
Combo Guard—Taylor Mikshell, Maryland, 5-11, Soph., 13 ppg, 3 reb, 3 ast, 42%
Shooting Guard—Destiny Pitts, Minnesota, 5-10, Jr., 16 ppg, 4 reb, 42%

3rd Team

Big—Kierstin Bell, Ohio State, Fr.
Big—Dorka Julasz, Ohio State, 6-4, Soph., 12 ppg, 9 reb, 46%
Wing—Imani Lewis,Wisconsin, 6-1, Soph., 12 ppg, 8 reb, 43%
Point Guard—Dominique Oden, Purdue, 5-8, Sr., 14 ppg, 4 reb, 3 ast, 43%
Shooting Guard—Lindsay Pulliam, Northwestern, 5-10, Jr., 16 ppg, 4 reb, 2 ast, 37%

4th Team

Big—Abi Scheid, Northwestern, 6-2, Sr., 9 ppg, 4 reb, 3 ast, 38%
Big—Brenna Wise, Indiana, 6-0, Sr., 12 ppg, 7 reb, 44%
Point Guard—Nia Clouden, Michigan State, 5-8, Soph., 12 ppg, 4 reb, 4 ast, 44%
Combo Guard—Brandi Beasley, Illinois, 5-6, Sr., 12 ppg, 4 reb, 5 ast, 41%
Combo Guard—Arella Guarantes, Rutgers, 5-11, Jr., 12 ppg, 4 reb, 2 ast, 52%

Wednesday, October 16, 2019

2019-2020 Season Preview: Big Ten Men

All of the various pre-season rankings are virtually unanimous, at least at the top of the pack. Everybody has got Michigan State, Maryland, Ohio State, Purdue and Michigan in that order. Illinois and Wisconsin are next in one order or the other. After that it’s a bit of a jumble. So here are 2 questions.

1. Who among the top 5 is gonna slip? And, trust me, somebody will. Last year, Nebraska was picked anywhere from #2 to #4 in the Big Ten. They went 6-14 and finished 11th. Bye-bye Tim Miles. And, Indiana was picked #3. Instead, the Hosers had a 1-12 streak and finished 9th.

2. Who among the next 9 is going to surprise? Now, here I’ll say that it’s not a given that anybody is. But, if they did…?

Which of the Big 5 Will Slip?

Purdue. The Boilers suffered the one biggest loss of anybody with the graduation of guard Carson Edwards. Now, compared to that, Michigan lost even more—top 3 scorers, and coach John Beilien, who decided to put his name in the NBA draft. But, Michigan also has 3 pretty good players coming back including 2 experienced guards in senior PG Zavier Simpson and junior SG Isaiah Livers, plus big Jon Teske. Purdue gets guard Nojel Eastern back plus Matt Haarans. And, of course, Purdue has Coach of the Year Matt Painter and Michigan has the inexperienced Juwan Howard. Still, talent on the floor wins. Michigan edges Purdue for 4th place.

Michigan State is a lock at #1, and Maryland almost the same at #2. Michigan will challenge Ohio State for the #3 spot. Those could be your 5 NCAA tournament entries, too, though I think, actually, 1 more will slip in.

Which of the Next 9 Will Surprise?

Illinois has the best talent but the Illini were just 12-21 last year. Wisconsin loses Ethan Happ but I know some smart people who thought he was terribly overrated. Penn State has Lamar Stevens back, and Iowa has Joe Weiskamp. 

But along with Happ, many of these teams also lost some top talent. Minnesota, for one; Iowa, for another; Rutgers and Northwestern, too. So I like Illinois at #6 and probably the last Big 10 entry into the NCAA tournament.

Big 10 Prediction

1. Michigan State 18-2
2. Maryland 16-4
3. Michigan 15-5
4. Ohio State 13-7
5. Purdue 13-7
6. Illinois 12-8

7. Wisconsin 10-10
8. Minnesota 9-11
9. Iowa 9-11
10. Penn State 8-12
11. Indiana 7-11
12. Rutgers 4-16
13. Nebraska 4-16
14. Northwestern 2-18

All-Big 10

As I’ve said before, an all-star team consists of 5 players that you might actually put on the floor—that is, 1 or 2 bigs with all those studs at the “1.” Cassius Winston is the pre-season Player of the Year.

Big—Jalen Smith, Maryland, 6-10, Soph., 12 ppg, 7 reb, 49% shooter
Big—Lamar Stevens, Penn State, 6-8, Sr., 20 ppg, 8 reb, 2 asts, 42% shooter
Point Guard—Cassius Winston, Michigan State, 6-1, Sr., 19 ppg, 3 reb, 7 asts, 47% 
Combo Guard—Anthony Cowan, Maryland, 6-0, Sr., 16 ppg, 4 asts, 39% shooter
Shooting Guard—Ayo Dosunmo, Illinois, 6-5, Soph., 14 ppg, 4 reb, 3 asts, 44% shooter

2nd Team

Big—Daniel Oturu, Minnesota, 6-10, Soph., 11 ppg, 7 reb, 55% shooter
Big—Kaleb Wesson, Ohio State, 6-9, Jr., 15 ppg, 7 reb, 2 asts, 50% shooter
Wing—Xavier Tillman, Michigan State, 6-8, Jr., 10 ppg, 7 reb, 2 blk, 60% shooter
Point Guard—Zavier Simpson, Michigan, 6-0, Sr., 9 ppg, 6 reb, 7 asts, 43% shooter
Shooting Guard—Nojel Eastern, Purdue, 6-6, Jr., 7 ppg, 5 reb, 2 asts, 49% shooter

3rd Team

Big—Jon Teske, Michigan, 7-1, Sr., 9 ppg, 7 reb, 52% shooter
Big—Luka Garza, Iowa, 6-11, Jr., 13 ppg, 4 reb, 53% shooter
Point Guard—D.J. Carton, Ohio State, 6-1, Fr.
Shooting Guard—Joshua Langford, Michigan State, 6-5, Sr., 15 ppg, 2 reb, 2 ast, 44%
Shooting Guard—Joe Weiskamp, Iowa, 6-5, Soph., 11 ppg, 5 reb, 49% shooter