An in-depth look at the Big 12 for next season( Teams 1-10), plus Superlatives, and international Players Preview.
Player Chart Legend / Index
- (3P/100): Three-point attempt volume, adjusted per 100 possessions (volume gauge). Quick rule of thumb: divide by 2 to estimate attempts per 30 minutes (starter minutes). Example: 16.0 ≈ 8 attempts per 30 mins ; 4.0 ≈ 2 attempts per 30 mins
- D-Rtg + BLKSTL%: Defensive Rating and combined Block + Steal % are not best defensive evaluation metrics, but together they offer a rough snapshot of defensive impact.
-
- D-Rtg (Defensive Rating): <100 = Good (lower is better)
-
- BLKSTL% (Block + Steal %): >4% = Strong for guards; >7% = Strong for bigs
- Status: Transfer status and previous school (in parentheses is their KenPom team ranking from last season for context).
- Notes: Key context not covered elsewhere — includes player weight (especially for bigs), Tout, standout traits, injury history etc…
- Highlighting/Bold: Any highlighted cell marks an extreme strength in that specific statistical category.
Classification Note: Not all European prospects are granted eligibility as freshman. I have no idea what classifications they’re being given, so a lot of the classifications next to the international players could be completely wrong.
#1 Houston
The Good
- Great positional size/“length”
- Defense should be scary good, new players touted for defense
- #2 high school recruiting class nationally
- 4 of 5 starters projected to be drafted next year; the 5th could be All-American
Question Marks
- No true power forwards — centers/big wings will man the 4-spot
- 10 returnees (extremely high), but 5 weren’t in rotation:
Good Experiment: touted developmental bench returnees vs. high production transfers - How will redshirts McFarland & McCarty look? (praised by staff)
The Bad
- Inexperienced. only 3 rotation players have notable D1 playing experience
Synopsis
Houston has arguably been the best defense in college basketball over the last few years, and now they’re adding size for the first time under Kelvin Sampson (normally undersized). This version of Houston has scary defensive and rebounding potential (Tugler has a 7’6" wingspan), along with plenty of offensive talent and shooting.
While the inexperience in actual D1 minutes is real, the bulk of the roster returns and already knows the system. Houston brings back 10 players — double the next closest Big 12 team. With Sampson at the helm and elite physical tools, this is a legitimate national title contender.
#2 Arizona
Lineup Decision: Peat noted he was recruited to Arizona to be a wing https://imgur.com/ns9qKG6 Lloyd had mentioned Krivas was their best player pre-injury (with Love and Vessar on roster) https://imgur.com/f7MYNl9
The Good
- Will probably be the most physically tough/strong team in the nation
- Potential to be the nation’s best rebounding team
- Defense should be great again
Question Marks
- Does Koa Peat have the agility to stay with 3s?
- Coach hyped Krivas for years as “their best player” if not for injury. Veesar reportedly transferred out because Krivas returned — but film hasn’t yet justified that hype.
The Bad
- All starters aren’t great shooters; Burries is only okay and streaky
- Very reliant on freshmen — top 8 is freshman-heavy, and #9–12 are also freshmen
Synopsis
One of the nation’s most underrated teams (currently ranked 10–15 range). The scouting report for 7 of their top 8 players highlights elite physicality and/or defense. Bradley (elite perimeter defender) can bully 99% of PGs, Peat can bully 99% of 3s, Awaka can bully 99% of 4s, and Krivas outsizes most centers. Burries and Kharchenkov are top-tier physical defenders with size. Weaknesses are overcomeable: freshman reliance is a concern, but defense and rebounding will carry them. If Peat can’t play the 3, move him to the 4 and start Kharchenkov. Bad shooting existed last year too (but they still finished #3 in the league) — they’re a transition team.
Tommy Lloyd is elite at creating offense without shooting (like he did at Gonzaga). They produce the most points with the fewest threes via transition. They have the personnel to dominate defensively and on the glass, plus a system that generates offense regardless of roster.
#3 BYU
The Good
- NBA offense: any combination of 1 through 4 can dribble and shoot really well
- The offense was great last year and should be even better this year
- They have the college version of LeBron & 3 of their 5 starters could make a case for All-American
- If international players succeed, they are 12 deep — 4 semi-touted but unknown internationals
Question Marks
- Unproven depth pieces — completely unknown foreign guys/HS recruits OR moderate-stats low-major players make up the bench
The Bad
- Really undersized with current makeup (Dybansta at the 4) — height/weight combination
- No shutdown defenders in the starting lineup
- Will likely struggle with physicality again
Synopsis
The floor is likely top 20. Last year’s formula should work again with some give and take: ie.at PG, they lose Demin’s impact size but gain Wright’s elite handles to handle pressure better.
High ceiling (national title) — 3 superstars and breakout pieces. The team lacks grit: “a team full of LeBrons and Currys but no Draymond or Iguodalas.”
The ceiling depends on whether one unknown depth piece (Dominique Diomande, Khadim Mboup, or Mihailo Boskovic) can play impactful/tough minutes at the 4, moving Dybansta to the 3. This would vastly improve defense/rebounding, that would push Davis into a legit bench weapon role, and make them look more like true title contenders.
#4 Texas Tech
The Good
- Likely Preseason National Player of the Year (Toppin)
- Lots of shooters in the starting lineup
- Similar core strengths to last year’s run
Question Marks
- Christian Anderson’s breakout — Tech’s hype hinges on him becoming a star
The Bad
- No real depth (rotation falls off after #6)
- Likely to play small (like last year)
- No notable perimeter defenders
Synopsis
As-is roster: Overhyped (ranked top 10 in many polls). Overreliant on Toppin/Anderson; guard play isn’t elite. Scoring plummets when Toppin sits. Depth is nonexistent compared to other top-10 teams.
If Ben Henshall joins: Changes everything. Henshall (starts over NBL multiyear pros overseas — including former high major all-conference players) adds a potential All-Conference star. With him + Toppin + Anderson, Tech would have three All-American-caliber players. A 7–8 man rotation built around that trio could absolutely contend for a national title. (Move them to #2.)
#5 Iowa State
The Good
- Key returners from last year’s strong team
- Defense should again be a strength — 4 of 5 starters are good defenders, the fifth is a 6’8" at the 3
- System-oriented program that should maintain its identity
The Bad
- Didn’t add enough talent to offset their offseason losses
- Shooting on paper looks poor — and the best shooter is an incoming freshman (risky to rely on)
Synopsis
Iowa State should still be a Top 25 team. TJ Otzelberger has earned trust as a coach, and the new roster isn’t far off from what they ran last year. For example, Gilbert wasn’t a great shooter, and Nelson replacing him as a not-great shooter won’t dramatically change the shooting profile. Batemon, a top-50 recruit known for shooting, should slide into the Curtis Jones role off the bench.
That said, it feels like Iowa State replaced last year’s core with slightly lesser “Walmart versions” of those same roles. Very high floor but lower ceiling team — no magic piece for title contention. They missed a major opportunity in the offseason. Had they landed a couple of big-time additions, they could have been national title contenders. Instead, they look like a solid but unspectacular team.
#6 Kansas State
Lineup Decision: Kostic over Abdi because Kstate payed Big NIL for him and ESPN high on him https://i.imgur.com/g0tXRVS.png
The Good
- All-American guard PJ Haggerty
- Bigs on the roster are notable defenders
- Abdi is an elite shooter — one of the highest 3-point rates in the country
- Nate Johnson was a top-60 transfer nationally, MAC Player of the Year and Defensive Player of the Year, and led Akron to the NCAA Tournament
Question Marks
- Major Euro prospects — if their overseas stats translate, Kansas State could be dominant
The Bad
- Shooting from the American players (outside Abdi) looks weak — Euro prospects will need to provide floor spacing
- Undersized in the post
Synopsis
This is one of the most underrated rosters in the entire country (not on any preseason Top 25). K-State is being overlooked — likely due to last year’s struggles and general unfamiliarity with Euro prospects — but the talent and depth are undeniable.
They have: An All-American (Haggerty). A POY/DPOY who led his team to the tournament (Johnson). A projected first-rounder per ESPN (Kostic) A power forward (Rapieque) logging legit EuroLeague minutes. Two elite defensive centers. 20-point and 16-point scorers coming off the bench
Heavy rumors of trying to add a top Euro big (eligibility pending) — if secured, it’s hard to even identify a clear weakness outside of cohesion.
Even without that addition, this is a deep, experienced, and highly competitive team — shockingly underrated heading into the season.
#7 Kansas
**Lineup Decision:**2 Center Lineup, Mbiya doesn’t leave a projected starting spot on a top-25 team to come be back-up to Flory. Flory’s a well-established centerpiece to pretend its open competition. Mbiya was too sought after. They were also very in on a bunch of other touted Centers. they must be getting told that they can play both together.
The Good
- Very switchable roster — 1–5 can defend any position respectably
- Gritty players — transfers known for defense/rebounding; half the returners are glue guys
- Superstar freshmen — most day-one ready freshman star, not just long-term potential
Question Marks
- Built around Peterson — no other high-capable scorers; can a freshman carry the load for title contention? (Many 5-stars fail yearly)
- Can Bryson Tiller (touted early enrollee) step up as an offensive-producing big?
The Bad
- For Kansas standards, this is a lackluster roster. Not deep
- No notable shooters outside maybe Peterson
- Lack of D1 experience (only 3 players averaged >20 mins last year_
Synopsis
A lackluster roster by Kansas standards. Extremely reliant on a freshman. The defense could be elite. The two-center lineup (Mbiya/Flory) fits Self’s history — he’s shown willingness to play two limited-offense bigs (e.g., KJ Adams at the 4).
Hard to believe Kansas couldn’t build better, but it could still work if Peterson lives up to the hype. A clear star with a role-playing supporting cast might actually suit Self better than last year’s “all-star team.”
Without the brand, this isn’t a title-contending roster. But with Self as coach, the floor is a middle-tier Big 12 team, with Top 3 upside.
#8 Baylor
The Good
- Really solid starting 5 with great size
- Could be really good defensively
- Could be a dominant rebounding team
The Bad
- A whole new team — no retained players
- Quality of depth falls off after the starters
- No real playmaking PG
- To crack elite status, Tounde has to be amazing — especially as a shooter (reliance on a singular freshman)
Synopsis
If Tounde plays like a All-American 5-star, this is a conference-contending roster on a short rotation. Cameron Carr (former top-50 recruit, bench at Tennessee as a freshman) is intriguing. Touted as a 6’6" sharpshooter, he could be the X-factor if Baylor unlocks his potential.
Skillings and Yessoufou are good defensive pieces with shooting questions, but Scott Drew’s teams always produce good offense (defense has been the question in recent years). This could be a case where Drew’s system brings the offense and the players’ natural skillset bring the defense — similar to their national title team.
#9 Cincinnati
The Good
- Crazy depth — 7 former starters from major programs + 2 top-50 recruits (even #10–11 are touted)
- All transfers from high-majors or elite mid-majors — minimal transition questions
- Two 7-foot NBA prospects — both can shoot 3s, have decent agility, and can play together
- Versatile lineup options
Question Marks
- Abaev’s wide range of potential — very low floor (7 pts, 28% 3P, defensive liability) to high ceiling (15 pts, 38% 3P, All-Conference); a shot-chucker
- No true SGs — top 4 guards are all PGs; how will it play out?
The Bad
- Lots of inefficient shot-chuckers — one of Jizzle, Abaev, or Kriisa must become an efficient scorer
- Potential spacing issues depending on lineups
Synopsis
On paper, this is a Top 20 team under a touted coach — but Wes Miller’s coaching credibility is still in question (for good reason). They’ll get no preseason hype, yet the roster quality is undeniable.
It’s not perfect: many players excel at only one thing (shooter/bad defense, defender/terrible offense, rebounder/zero perimeter agility). Rotation cohesion will be critical.
Don’t trust Wes Miller, but this is a Sweet 16/Elite 8 roster if the pieces click.
Preseason Conference Awards:
JT Toppin - Big 12 POY
Joseph Tugler - Big 12 DPOY
Darryn Peterson - Freshmen of the Year
PJ Haggerty - Newcomer of the Year
Abdi Bashir Jr. - 6th MOY
1st Team: JT Toppin, Darryn Peterson, Milos Uzan, Richie Saunders, PJ Haggerty
2nd Team: Joshua Jefferson, AJ Dybantsa, Koa Peat, Joseph Tugler, Christian Anderson
