3 Observations Worth Considering From the Preseason KenPom Rankings
The preseason KenPom rankings are out. While these rankings mean little given all the offseason roster movement, there are three small IU-related takeaways worth considering.
The preseason KenPom rankings are out.
Indiana sits at #39, which is at the lower end of where we’ve seen the Hoosiers ranked this offseason:
KenPom: #39
Torvik: #30
CBS Sports: #18
ESPN: #18
One theme I’ve noticed is that the human analysts (the bottom two above) seem to like Indiana better than the computer algorithms.
It should also be noted that ranking teams in the offseason has never been more of an inexact science given all the roster movement that now occurs. So take all offseason rankings with big grains of salt.
There are only a few small takeaways worth considering as we prep for the college basketball season:
A range of 18-39 seems fair for this Indiana team.
Given that Indiana finished last season all the way down at #91 in KenPom, being #39 actually represents an encouraging jump. It’s a testament to the work Mike Woodson and his staff did this offseason to rebuild a broken roster.
The rankings jump represents the stability offered by Malik Reneau, Trey Galloway, and Mackenzie Mgbako staying put, plus the proven production Indiana is adding with Luke Goode, Oumar Ballo, Myles Rice, and Kanaan Carlyle. Adding a 5-star freshman for depth also helps, as does having additional veteran depth in Gabe Cupps and Anthony Leal.
But there are reasonable questions about how the new pieces will gel, especially on defense, and how Indiana’s new-look offense will operate. Plus, let’s be honest, Indiana’s recent history of playing to its preseason KenPom ranking isn’t very good. (More on this in a bit.)
So even if that KenPom ranking strikes you as low — and hopefully it proves to be — I can’t quibble with it too much.
The humans think IU has a top-20 roster while the computers see more of a mid-30s team. I’d split the difference and say this feels like a borderline top-25 team entering the season … with the potential to be much, much more.
Indiana has struggled to play to its preseason computer rankings.
Here is the dark side of KenPom ranking Indiana #39: if recent trends hold, the Hoosiers won’t even sniff the 50s.
Let’s look at how Indiana has performed against its preseason KenPom ranking every year since 2013. The first number is the preseason ranking; the second number is the final ranking.
Hold your nose and dive in:
2025: 39 → ?
2024: 50 → 91 (-41)
2023: 12 → 30 (-18)
2022: 30 → 48 (-18)
2021: 26 → 50 (-24)
2020: 34 — 34 (0)
2019: 27 → 52 (-25)
2018: 65 → 71 (-6)
2017: 16 → 44 (-28)
2016: 13 ← 11 (+2)
2015: 26 → 48 (-22)
2014: 25 → 63 (-38)
Average: -19.82
You don’t even really need further summary. That’s obviously not good.
Over the last 11 seasons, there have been six seasons in which Indiana has underperformed its preseason KenPom ranking by 24 spots or more. That’s a whole lot of disappointment and unmet expectations.
If you wonder why Indiana fans seem increasingly frustrated by the season, the macro reasons boil down mostly to this: for most of the last decade, under three different coaches, it's often felt like we've been less than the sum of the parts.
This season is a huge opportunity for Indiana to start reversing this trend.
The Big Ten projects as mediocre but absurdly deep
Indiana’s ranking of #39 places the Hoosiers smack dab in the middle of a Big Ten loaded with NCAA Tournament-quality teams:
#10 Purdue
#23 Illinois
#26 UCLA
#29 Oregon
#31 Ohio State
#33 Iowa
#35 Michigan State
#36 Michigan
#37 Maryland
#39 Indiana
#46 Wisconsin
#50 Northwestern
#56 Nebraska
#57 USC
#59 Minnesota
#61 Penn State
#63 Rutgers
#75 Washington
Having 18 teams between 10 and 75 is just crazy depth, even if there are no clear Final Four candidates, at least according to the computers.
Once again, the humans like Indiana better than the computers. In the “official unofficial” poll of Big Ten beat writers, Indiana was picked to finish second in the league. So there is clearly a wide range of reasonable ways to project this crowded conference before the games begin.
A few additional observations:
Even the clear favorite, Purdue, is facing the massive question of how to replace Zach Edey.
Illinois is replacing almost all of its meaningful players.
There are six Big Ten teams in the 30s alone!
The conference’s projected #17 team, Rutgers, has the two best NBA prospects in the league in projected top-10 picks Ace Bailey and Dylan Harper.
Will this be the year the Big Ten’s national title drought ends? It’s tough to see any team with that kind of potential. Heck, let’s just hope a few Big Ten teams are still standing after what projects to be a bloodbath of a regular season.
What are your takeaways from the KenPom preseason rankings and other offseason projections you’ve seen?
This year's KenPom preseason rankings demonstrate the limitations of early season computer rankings in the age of college free agency. Many teams have been totally made over and the previous records of many transferred players are often not terribly relevant to their current situation.
Analytics are won or lost by how you perform v analytics projections. Last year when IU played the early games they got curb stomped by teams like Auburn and barely eked out wins against lower ranked competition. We need to be competitive and hopefully get some wins in the Bahamas and destroy all the lower ranked we play this year. If we do, our analytics will rise.