2022 Guide To March Madness

Introduction
To win the NCAA Tournament, a team must win six games against six different opponents. The
opponents will all have different styles, different personnel, and different strengths and weaknesses.
This is what drives my evaluation process. The biggest factors I think about when going through
evaluations are versatility, personnel, coaching, and scalability.
Versatility is everything in March. One of the great things about college basketball is many teams play
divergently different schemes and styles. This can cause issues for some teams. Teams that cannot or
will not play multiple different styles are more likely to lose compared to teams that can adapt to
different matchups. If a team can only play with a big center, it is likely they will face a team that can
spread the floor or run spread ball screens at him. Defense is the side of the ball that first comes to mind
when we think of versatility, but it is also very important on offense. Can you succeed against different
styles of defense? What happens when you play a team designed to shut off your primary option? How
about your secondary option? Versatility on both ends is arguably the biggest factor I tend to look at.
Elite-level personnel alone can raise the ceiling of a team. At the end of the day, the team with the best
players on the court is probably going to be the one which is most likely to win. Personnel does go
beyond the players on the court, however. How does the personnel fit together? How does the
personnel fit within the scheme the coach runs? How does your personnel compare to other teams’
personnel? How many players do you have that can come into the game and contribute? The other
factors matter, but sometimes personnel can trump everything else.
Coaching is one of the most underrated aspects of basketball. Coaches seemingly only gets thought
about when really good or really bad things happen to a team, but there is so much going on that people
rarely think about. What is the gameplan? What are the in-game adjustments? What’s the scheme?
What’s the culture? How are your assistants helping? Have you prepared your team well enough? What
sets are you running? Coaching can make up for deficiencies in other areas. Coaching is also vital for any
team that wants to make a deep run in March.
Scalability matters for a lot of these teams outside of the high-major conferences. This season, there are
a ton of talented mid-major teams in the tournament that have had fantastic seasons. Not all of them
can scale to playing against the best teams in the tournament. These smaller teams have to answer
more questions before I take them more seriously, but for good reason. They have all objectively played
a weaker schedule. Do they have enough size to compete? Does their style of play on both ends
translate? Do they have the talent level across the board to compete? These ideas can also apply to
high-major teams in specific conferences. Can ACC teams handle the physicality of other conferences?
Can Big 10 teams handle the versatility of other conferences? Can Pac 12 teams handle the speed of
other conferences? The idea of scalability goes both ways.
There is another major factor that goes into picking games and determining a champion: luck. Luck is a
rarely talked about aspect amongst most sports fans but has major consequences on single game
results. In college basketball, luck has a major impact on every single game. Games are only 40 minutes
and 70 possessions. A few unexpected misses or makes can completely change a game in ways that can
only be attributed to luck. However, some teams create their own luck. There are teams that play a style
of high variability, generally meaning they shoot and allow more 3s. Some teams create their own luck
by being able to generate more reliable looks at the rim and from the free throw line if outside shots
aren’t falling. There is a balance between playing a high variance strategy and being able to go away
from that if it isn’t working. Higher variance teams naturally have higher upsides but are more
susceptible to upsets. This is really tough to look at from an evaluation standpoint.
When I do these evaluations, watching the games is really important to me. I want to see what these
teams do and what the players look like. This could not be done without watching obscene amounts
of film. When I am watching games, I am just as curious as to what is happening off the ball as I am to
what is happening on it. Coverages, sets, and off-ball movements on offense and defense are very
important to these evaluations. Since I obviously can’t watch every game, I use numbers to help my
evaluations. KenPom, Haslametrics, and Synergy are the three resources I used to gain knowledge on
each team. When doing evaluations, I do not look at the team’s record or where they rank on the seed
line/AP Poll. I care far more about the process and find the record and ranking rather useless towards
my evaluation. The seed line, AP Poll, record, and single game results tend to trick people more than
they help.
My rankings will be broken up into tiers, with teams being ranked inside of those individual tiers. The
general order is based on who I think is most likely to win the NCAA Tournament. In other words, if I had
to put a percent chance to win the tournament next to each team, the rankings would be from highest
to lowest percent chance. The idea of tiers is that I would not have an issue with alternate rankings
within the tiers, but I think there is a discernable difference between teams in different tiers. Rankings
would also change in certain matchups, so it is likely in an individual game I could pick a team to win that
is ranked much lower. There are 12 tiers in the rankings:
Tier 1: Championship favorites

Tier 2: Strong Final Four contenders
Tier 3: Possible Final Four participants with some luck
Tier 4: Strong Elite Eight candidates
Tier 5: Strong Second Weekend candidates
Tier 6: Second Weekend hopefuls
Tier 7: Can win two games but need some luck
Tier 8: Round 1 underdogs that can win a game, maybe two
Tier 9: Fighting chance in Round 1
Tier 10: Cinderella potential
Tier 11: It’s possible but unbelievably unlikely
Tier 12: So you’re telling me there’s a chance?
The margins get smaller and smaller outside of tier 2. Anyone can lose to anyone, which is what makes
this time of year so great.
A 68-team single elimination tournament is the most unique style of picking an end of season champion
of any league in the country. The great thing about it is that it creates a completely artificial
environment where the best team wins the championship less often than they win it. For example, if a
team had a 90% chance of winning every single game in the tournament (ridiculous favorite), they
would be expected to win the tournament only 53% of the time. It’s called madness for a reason, and at
the end of the day making brackets is nothing but guessing and hoping for some luck.
Making brackets is an insane guessing game. The odds of making a perfect bracket are 1 in
9,223,372,036,854,775,808. My favorite way of putting this into perspective to people is this: if I
traveled anywhere in the world and picked a grain of sand, you would have a better chance of traveling
the world and picking that same grain of sand on your first guess than picking a perfect bracket. Another
one of my favorites is that if you made a bracket every second, it would take you 292 billion years to
create every possible combination. All of this is if we assume every game is a coin flip, which of course
it’s not. Even if you factor in probabilities of winning into each round, your odds of a perfect bracket are
1 in 120.2 billion. Those odds are still ridiculously small.
The goal of this guide is not to help anyone achieve a perfect bracket, but to make your chances of
picking one better than 1 in 120.2 billion. This guide should help people learn a thing or two about the
teams in the field and help them better understand how these teams stack up against one another.
Again, this is all about guessing, but hopefully this can make you a more educated guesser than most.
Advanced
1.1. Example Page Tier.Rank. Team Name
KenPom: | Barttorvik: | EvanMiya: | Haslametrics: | SQ:
Metrics
Depth Chart
Coach: Coach Name
PG: Player Name | Position | Feet’Inches” B1:
SG: B2: Coach, Starters,
SF: B3: & Bench
PF: B4:
C: B5:
Player Stats
KenPom player
stats
Quick Player Evaluations

• Player Name: Brief sentence or two on each rotation player
Scheme
• A few bullets on offensive scheme (motion based vs. set based vs. read & react based,
etc.) and defensive scheme (ball screen coverages, pack line vs. no middle, help
responsibilities, etc.)
Strengths
• Bullets on the teams’ strengths, loosely ordered by importance
Weaknesses
• Bullets on the teams’ weaknesses, loosely ordered by importance
Evaluation
A paragraph summarizing my thoughts on the team. Overview of strengths and
weaknesses and how they might affect matchups. General thoughts on the teams’
tournament outlook and how effectively they can scale to the best competition.
KenPom team
stats
Rankings
Tier Rank Team Seed Overall Seed
1 1 Gonzaga 1 1
2 2 Arizona 1 2
2 3 Baylor 1 4
2 4 Duke 2 8
3 5 Kansas 1 3
3 6 Texas Tech 3 12
3 7 Arkansas 4 16
3 8 Kentucky 2 6
3 9 Villanova 2 7
3 10 Auburn 2 5
4 11 Purdue 3 11
4 12 UCLA 4 13
4 13 Tennessee 3 10
4 14 LSU 6 22
5 15 Virginia Tech 11 46
5 16 Houston 5 18
5 17 Connecticut 5 17
5 18 Alabama 6 21
5 19 Illinois 4 14
5 20 Iowa 5 20
5 21 Texas 6 23
6 22 Saint Mary’s 5 19
6 23 Boise State 8 29
6 24 San Diego State 8 31
6 25 Wisconsin 3 9
6 26 Memphis 9 36
6 27 Murray State 7 26
6 28 San Francisco 10 27
7 29 Marquette 9 35
7 30 Loyola Chicago 10 39
7 31 Seton Hall 8 32
7 32 Miami 10 38
7 33 Colorado State 6 24
7 34 Michigan 11 42
7 35 Ohio State 7 28
8 36 TCU 9 34
8 37 Michigan State 7 27
8 38 USC 7 25
8 39 Indiana 12 45
8 40 Rutgers 11 44
8 41 North Carolina 8 30
9 42 UAB 12 48
9 43 Davidson 10 48
9 44 Providence 4 15
9 45 Creighton 9 33
9 46 Notre Dame 11 47
9 47 Wyoming 12 43
9 48 Iowa State 11 41
10 49 South Dakota State 13 52
10 50 Chattanooga 13 51
10 51 Montana State 14 58
10 52 Richmond 12 49
10 53 Vermont 13 53
10 54 New Mexico State 12 50
11 55 Bryant 16 66
11 56 Longwood 14 55
11 57 Jacksonville State 15 61
11 58 Colgate 14 57
11 59 Saint Peter’s 15 60
11 60 Akron 13 54
11 61 Texas Southern 16 67
11 62 Georgia State 16 63
12 63 Norfolk State 16 64
12 64 Cal State Fullerton 15 62
12 65 Delaware 15 59
12 66 Wright State 16 65
12 67 Yale 14 56
12 68 Texas A&M-CC 16 68
1.1. Gonzaga
KenPom: 1 | Barttorvik: 1 | EvanMiya: 1 | Haslametrics: 1 | SQ: 1
Depth Chart
Coach: Mark Few
PG: Andrew Nembhard | Guard | 6’5” B1: Nolan Hickman | Guard | 6’2”
SG: Rasir Bolton | Guard | 6’3” B2: Anton Watson | Forward | 6’8”
SF: Julian Strawther | Wing | 6’7” B3: Hunter Sallis | Wing | 6’5”
PF: Chet Holmgren | Big | 7’0” B4: Ben Gregg | Forward | 6’10”
C: Drew Timme | Big | 6’10” B5: Kaden Perry | Forward | 6’9”
Player Stats

• Chet Holmgren: One of the best rim protectors in the country. Can defend on the perimeter. Grab and
go at times. Really good shooter. Good lob threat. Can attack closeouts. Ridiculous player who can do
everything, arguably the best player in the country.
• Drew Timme: One of the better post players in college basketball. Good passer as well on doubles. Not
much of a shooter. Doesn’t move well laterally on the perimeter defensively and isn’t a plus rim
protector.
• Andrew Nembhard: High-level pick and roll operator. Makes good decisions, can get into the lane and
score. Good at the point of attack defensively. Improved shooter.
• Julian Strawther: Really good 3 and D wing with size. Good shooter and can attack closeouts. Defends
to opposing best wing well. Not a ton of on-ball duties.
• Rasir Bolton: Best shooter in the rotation, can pull off the dribble or shoot off of movement. Can be a
weapon in pick and roll with the shot as well. Not as good defensively, not great tools.
• Nolan Hickman: More limited offensive role, will run some pick and roll and can spot up. Pushes in
transition. Helpful defensive player despite the size.
• Anton Watson: Improved defensively playing next to another big. Can give some rim protection, but
not great moving on the perimeter. Good finisher but not a shooter.
• Hunter Sallis: Best wing athlete on the team, good for defending opposing wings. Not much of an
offensive role outside of transition. Not a threat to shoot. Good cutter and finisher.
Scheme
• Heavily push the ball in transition
• Will play with two big men, a lot of handoffs and screens in their read-heavy
motion offense
• Will play at the level of the ball screen with Timme, Chet plays drop
Strengths
• They are one of the best teams in the country at generating looks near the rim and
finishing on those looks. Timme is the main recipient off slips, rolls, and post touches.
• They generally play with four players that can shoot around one really good post big,
which is a difficult recipe to defend
• Chet puts an absolute lid on the rim, it’s really hard to score there when he’s
defending. Their scheme allows him to almost always be near the rim.
• One of the better pick and roll teams with guards that can shoot and pass and big men
that can roll, short roll, and Chet can pop
• They focus on forcing shots in the midrange defensively, making early rotations on the
backline and closing out to shooters on the perimeter
• Really good at defending in pick and rolls with the addition of Chet
• Incredible in transition at consistently pushing the ball and getting easy looks
• Not only great at posting up, but great at what they do when there is a post up
• They rotate through three guards that rarely turn the ball over
• Really good defensive rebounding team, ended possessions kicks off transition
• High feel offensive team, they get a lot of easy points off cuts
• They finish on offensive rebounds at a wild rate
• Really good at limiting fouls and opponent offensive rebounds
• Excellent at getting back in transition
Weaknesses
• Timme can be attacked as a rim protector if Chet is involved in the primary screening
action or a dummy action off the ball
• Foot speed on the perimeter becomes an issue if they are playing a 5-out team
• Timme doesn’t play as well against big, physical centers who won’t pick up fouls
against him
• They don’t have elite perimeter self-creation
• They don’t have a ton of depth and bring players out in foul trouble
• Can be a little reliant on transition to generate offense
Evaluation
It’s scary how few weaknesses this team has. It takes a specific type of team to contend with Gonzaga,
and not many teams fit the bill. I think the metrics can slightly overrate Gonzaga because they are
designed to demolish bad teams, but I am comfortable saying this is the most likely team to win the
championship. Holmgren fills in the holes this team had a year ago. He is a revolutionary rim protector
while being a great floor spacer. The emergence of Nembhard as a pick and roll maestro, combined with
the excellent spacing of Bolton and Strawther create an unstoppable offensive team. They are great
defensively as well with great size and scheme discipline. To beat them, you’d likely need to play more
of a 5-out scheme to attack Timme and keep Holmgren away from the rim, but you’d also need the
duality of someone that can guard Timme on the other end of the floor. Bigger teams with tons of talent
can do it (Duke), or teams with incredible spacing and players who can really hit the opposite corner on
the move (Alabama). There are also pathways to beating this team by getting Chet in foul trouble or
with outlier shooting performances. March is about matchups, but this team is built to matchup with
almost anyone. The Zags are my National Championship favorites.
2.2. Arizona
Depth Chart
Coach: Tommy Lloyd
PG: Kerr Kriisa | Guard | 6’3” B1: Pelle Larsson | Guard | 6’5”
SG: Bennedict Mathurin | Wing | 6’7” B2: Justin Kier | Guard | 6’4”
SF: Dalen Terry | Wing | 6’7” B3: Oumar Ballo | Big | 7’0”
PF: Azoulas Tubelis | Forward | 6’11” B4: Kim Aiken | Wing | 6’7”
C: Christian Koloko | Big | 7’1” B5: Shane Nowell | Guard | 6’6”
Player Stats

• Bennedict Mathurin: Ridiculous movement shooter, can also attack closeouts and finish at the rim.
Has developed more on the ball throughout the season. Occasional passing and creation flashes. Strong
on-ball defender, great athlete.
• Christian Koloko: Long, athletic center that plays his role well. Arguably the best defensive player in
the country. Catches lobs, sets screens, and protects the rim. Good enough athlete to show some
versatility. Not too skilled and a little skinny.
• Kerr Kriisa: Solid playmaker in pick and roll. Fits perfectly in their system with his general IQ. Small
frame and not a great athlete, holds him back for finishing and defense.
• Dalen Terry: Great frame for a wing, great athlete. Good cutter and finisher, attacks closeouts well and
is a solid passer. Really good defensively. Ball handling and shot are weaknesses.
• Azoulas Tubelis: Skilled big forward, good footwork on the interior and great touch. Good passer.
Limited shooter from 3 and limited athlete. Not great defensively.
• Pelle Larsson: Big guard with some shooting and ball handling ability. Not a great athlete but solid
defensively. Very useful player off the bench.
• Justin Kier: Positive point of attack defender, solid ball handler who can run pick and roll and make
reads. Inconsistent shooter, but still a threat to score from out there. Skilled player for someone that
comes off the bench.
• Oumar Ballo: Big frame, skill development has been there throughout the season. Comfortable on the
block or as the roller, good rim protector. Not a ton of perimeter movement skills.
Scheme
• Really push the ball in transition
• A lot of 3 out 2 in
• Tons of off-ball screens, cutting, handoffs, and back doors. All reads in their motion
offense.
• A lot of high-lows with two big men
• Drop coverage in ball screens
Strengths
• They put out a massive group, multiple plus athletes
• Great at generating shots in the paint, Lloyd does a fantastic job of using high-lows
and other actions. Generates post touches effectively.
• Pushing the ball as much as they do with their athletes generates a lot of easy looks
• Beautiful offensive system that is really difficult to gameplan for. Players are excellent
at making reads and playing out of different concepts.
• Koloko does a great job of plugging holes as a rim protector, Ballo of the bench is also
good with rim protection
• Koloko and Ballo are really good in drop coverage
• Lloyd does a great job of using movement shooters in Mathurin and Kriisa to generate
looks for them and others
• Most players are plus passers and good cutters, excellent at scoring off cuts
• Mathurin and Terry are really good individual point of attack defenders
• They are really good at generating free throws, utilizing size and strength well
• They attack the offensive glass and get a ton of rebounds
• They don’t commit very many fouls defensively despite the rim protection
• They really force opponents to shoot midrange jumpers
Weaknesses
• Playing three non-shooters is definitely questionable at times against teams who really
play gaps or aggressively help off them
• They don’t have a ton of high-level ball handling or creation, more about sum of the
parts with them in that regard
• There are definitely individuals that can be attacked on defense
• Not a great team later in the shot clock, can’t just run a pick and roll and generate
something
• Can struggle more against bigger teams that help really aggressively
Evaluation
Tommy Lloyd has done an unbelievable job with this team. Arizona plays a similar style to Gonzaga, but
it’s a style that’s generated incredible results over the years. The easiest form of offense comes in
transition, and few teams understand that better than Arizona. In the halfcourt, they use actions that
accentuate their strengths. Read-heavy motion offense is difficult to defend because nothing is scripted.
The players do a wonderful job of flowing from action to action. Lloyd has figured out how to play
multiple non-shooting big men at the same time through mixing in high-lows, ball screens, and handoffs.
Defensively, they have tons of size, and arguably the best defensive player in the country lurking around
the rim. Lloyd has counters to teams attacking their weaker defenders. I am still worried about what
happens when teams lean into not guarding their non-shooters. I also wonder what happens if teams
really go at some of their weaker defensive players. Their lack of individual self-creation is also a concern
for scaling up to play the very best teams. Teams that play with a lot of frontcourt size have been able to
give their offense some troubles. I still feel comfortable with Arizona this high because few teams can
match their size and skill level. They are full of big, high-feel players that mesh together really well.
Tommy Lloyd has converted me to an Arizona believer.
2.3. Baylor
Depth Chart
Coach: Scott Drew
PG: James Akinjo | Guard | 6’1” B1: LJ Cryer | Guard | 6’1”
SG: Adam Flagler | Guard | 6’3” B2: Jeremy Sochan | Forward | 6’9”
SF: Matthew Mayer | Wing | 6’9” B3: Dale Bonner | Guard | 6’2”
PF: Kendall Brown | Forward | 6’8” B4: Jordan Turner | Wing | 6’8”
C: Flo Thamba | Big | 6’10” B5: Zach Loveday | Big| 7’0”
Player Stats

• James Akinjo: Highest usage and most talented guard on the team, also is a tough defensive player
who is great at executing scheme. Fights over screens, gets into ball handlers, runs pick and roll well.
Good shooter. Could be a better playmaker and can force the issue at times.
• Adam Flagler: Really talented shooter, does a lot off the catch but can also shoot off the dribble. Good
in pick and roll. Solid enough defensively in the scheme.
• LJ Cryer: Good shooter in multiple areas, can shoot it off of movement. Not as good of a shot creator.
Solid defensively against smaller player at the point of attack but limited with size for switching.
• Matthew Mayer: Big wing/forward that can shoot the ball and attack closeouts. Not great with self-
creation, poor passer. Really good defensively on or off the ball.
• Kendall Brown: Great athlete, fantastic cutter with some ball handling ability. Doesn’t create in
isolation and isn’t a shooter. Good defender on and off the ball.
• Jeremy Sochan: Big forward who can handle the ball and smart passer. Great role player. Good
defender who is switchable. Shot is questionable.
• Flo Thamba: More powerful of the two centers, good rim protector and decent mobility for size. Also,
a good lob partner. Mobile, but not great when asked to switch.
• Dale Bonner: Has been forced into more action with injuries, confident guard that does a little too
much. Inconsistent shooter but capable ball handler. Doesn’t have great positional size.
Scheme
• No Middle: Baylor is going to force opponents to drive towards the baseline and
attempt to keep the ball on one side of the floor
• Flo Thamba will play at the level of ball screens, otherwise most screens will be a
switch, especially with Sochan at the 5
• Very pick and roll heavy offense, sets are designed for guards to be able to attack
downhill in the middle third of the floor
Strengths
• Great guard trio in Akinjo, Flagler, and Cryer. All three of them can create shots, shoot
it off the dribble, and run pick and roll.
• Great forward group with a ton of versatility on both ends. They allow them to do a lot
of switching defensively without giving up anything and they can all handle the ball.
• High-level pick and roll team, a lot of their offense uses it in very effective ways
• Great execution of scheme, it’s really tough to get into the paint against them
• Can seamlessly go with bigger or small lineups, Sochan at the 5 opens a lot up
• Aggressive defensively without fouling, they force a lot of turnovers
• One of the better teams at switching and containing actions to the perimeter
• Aggressive on the offensive glass, get a ton of rebounds
• Really good closeout team, they help aggressively but do a good job at recovering
• They go after the offensive glass and get a lot of rebounds
• Players are really talented finishers around the rim
• They have multiple high-level shooters
• Aggressive defense at the point of attack forces a lot of turnovers
• Excellent at pushing the ball in transition, especially with Brown
• Really good cutting team in general. Brown especially is lethal cutting to the rim.
Weaknesses
• They have multiple non-shooting threats on the perimeter
• A little reliant on tough shot-making from guards
• They don’t get enough self-generated looks at the rim, also causes them to struggle to
get to the free throw line
• Too much Akinjo at times, wish he was less aggressive forcing his own shot
• Can be attacked with pick and roll with the right players running it at Thamba
• Not very good at defending in transition
• Injury to Tchamwa Tchatchoua kills their depth and center rotation
• There is a lack of high-level playmaking on this team
• Rim protection could be better
Evaluation
I’d feel a lot better about Baylor is Jonathan Tchamwa Tchatchoua wasn’t injured. He gives this team a
different level of versatility, athleticism, and vertical spacing. However, this is still a very talented group.
The thrive within their ball screen heavy system, with multiple guards that can handle, shoot it off the
dribble, and make some playmaking reads. They have a dynamic offensive attack that is difficult to
defend, especially when the wings are making smart cuts along the back lines of help schemes. They
don’t have major weaknesses defensively, as they have size and are scheme versatile. They can also go
with smaller or bigger lineup configurations depending on the matchup. Paint touches are very difficult
for opponents to generate. However, this is not the Baylor team of last season. The guards can tend to
force the issue at times, with some of their forwards unable to create their own. They are a little reliant
on making tougher shots, and general playmaking is an issue for them. Defensively, I wish they had a
little more rim protection. To contend with this team, you need really good point of attack defense
combined with good size and athleticism. You’re also going to need plus playmaking and shooting.
Baylor is still a very high-level team who can certainly make a run.
2.4. Duke
Depth Chart
Coach: Mike Krzyzewski
PG: Trevor Keels | Guard | 6’4” B1: Jeremy Roach | Guard | 6’1”
SG: Wendell Moore | Wing | 6’5” B2: Theo John | Big | 6’9”
SF: AJ Griffin | Wing | 6’6” B3: Joey Baker | Wing | 6’6”
PF: Paolo Banchero | Forward | 6’10” B4: Bates Jones | Forward | 6’8”
C: Mark Williams | Big | 7’0” B5: Jaylen Blakes | Guard | 6’1”
Player Stats

• Paolo Banchero: Matchup nightmare. Can score on the block against smaller players but can score on
the perimeter against almost anyone. Good defender on the perimeter. Wish passing was better but has
improved throughout the season.
• AJ Griffin: Really impressive shooter, great second side creator. Really good cutter. Solid point of
attack defender, also decent off the ball. Self-creation at the rim could be better.
• Wendell Moore: Good sized wing that can handle the ball and get to his spots. Good on or off the ball.
Has become a good shooter. Good point of attack defender. Very useful all-around player.
• Trevor Keels: Can handle the ball in pick and roll, capable shooter, and good passer. Good defender on
the perimeter. Uses strength advantage really well to get to spots. Not a great traditional athlete.
• Mark Williams: High level rim protector, mobile for someone of his size. One of the best defensive
players in the country. Good finisher around the rim, great complimentary big man.
• Jeremy Roach: Solid player in pick and roll, decent defender at the point of attack. Wish he could just
do more with the ball in his hands. Not a great athlete and doesn’t have great size.
• Theo John: Really strong frame, a little undersized by knows how to use strength. Useful big in his role,
protects the rim, grabs rebounds, and finishes.
• Joey Baker: Solid shooter, decent cutter. Not very good defensively and doesn’t do much with the ball
in his hands.
Scheme
• A lot of drop coverage with Mark Williams, can also play at the level
• Everything is designed to be funneled towards Williams in the middle
• They’ve been running a similar motion offense for a long time
Strengths
• They have 5 potential first round picks and start all five of them, just a ridiculously
talented team with pieces that fit together
• Banchero is arguably the best player in the country, such a tough matchup offensively
• Having such talented wings with size isn’t something any other college basketball
team can match. All of Moore, Keels, and Griffin as very good on or off the ball, all
complementary players.
• There are a lot of players on this team that can run pick and roll and be effective
• Shot creation is a massive strength of this team
• Mark Williams can guard in the post and wall off the rim defensively
• Point of attack defense at all spots is a plus, really good at defending in isolations
• Very low turnover team
• Pick and rolls are effective for multiple players when they are used
• They do a really good job of defending in pick and roll within their drop scheme
• They have a lot of size at multiple spots, essentially play with all plus sized players
• They have some versatility with the ability to play Banchero at the 5
Weaknesses
• They don’t have a strong player who is a true point guard, can lead to a lot of
inconsistency with their team
• Not a ton of elite playmaking, more secondary players
• Rim pressure is something this team doesn’t get a ton of at times
• Their offense can get very stagnant and isolation heavy at times
• They can take a lot of tough shots on offense
• They don’t generate a ton of shots from behind the arc despite having good shooters
• They guard the 3-point line at the expense of giving up a lot of looks in the paint
• They rarely force turnovers
• They aren’t good at grabbing defensive rebounds
• Despite the players they have, they don’t get to the line very often
• There is a major lack of depth
Evaluation
Despite the ups and downs of the season, Duke can still put out one of the most talented five-man
groups of the past decade. Very few teams have been able to play with five potential first round picks
that can share the floor together. There is no lack of offensive creation with this team. Paolo excels at
getting his own. Moore and Keels can generate offense in a variety of ways. Griffin is an absolutely lethal
shooter who can attack closeouts. Even Williams in the post is a good option. The issue is when they get
stagnant. That lack of a true primary lead guard hurts them. Their offense can be inconsistent at times
and deforms often into isolation play. Duke needs the pieces working together to generate the best
results. Defensively, they are also strong. They have no weak links within their starting group. They have
plus size and athleticism everywhere. Mark Williams is absolutely excellent at defending the rim, and
Duke pushes everything towards that strength. 5-out teams (Miami) have given them some problems. If
you can pull Williams away from the rim, you can have more success. If you have an athletic forward to
handle Paolo as well as a lot of size on the perimeter, you can manage their dynamic offensive attack.
Duke has had somewhat of an up and down season, but I’m ranking them this high because of the
outlier level of talent on this team. No one in the country can match their talent level, and Duke has not
been short on flashes of greatness.
3.5. Kansas
Depth Chart
Coach: Bill Self
PG: Dajuan Harris | Guard | 6’1” B1: Remy Martin | Guard | 6’0”
SG: Ochai Agbaji | Wing | 6’5” B2: Mitch Lightfoot | Big | 6’8”
SF: Christian Braun | Wing | 6’6” B3: KJ Adams | Forward | 6’7”
PF: Jalen Wilson | Forward | 6’8” B4: Jalen Coleman-Lands | Guard | 6’4”
C: David McCormack | Big | 6’10” B5: Jospeh Yesufu | Guard | 6’0”
Player Stats

• Ochai Agbaji: Best wing in college basketball. Fantastic offensive weapon with movement shooting
and ability to attack closeouts. Doesn’t do a ton of self-creation but can come off screens and handoffs
and get downhill. Excellent defender on and off the ball.
• Christian Braun: Another really good wing. Excels in transition. Good cutter and can handle the ball.
Shooting hasn’t been great, but he’s capable. Good defensively on and off the ball.
• Jalen Wilson: Forward that can handle the ball and hit shots. Has been getting better throughout the
year, but shooting has been off. Can do some switching defensively.
• David McCormack: Big, physical center that has been inconsistent. Motor level on defense has been
on and off throughout the year. Isn’t a great post player, better as a play finisher.
• Remy Martin: Quick guard with a good handle, not a good playmaker or decision maker. Can defend
guards at the point of attack but undersized.
• Dajuan Harris: Steady point guard that runs the offense at times, although not a major threat to score.
Really good point of attack defender with some length, but undersized and skinny.
• Mitch Lightfoot: Backup big that’s been there forever, plays bigger than his size would indicate. Good
role player off the bench, although doesn’t have great skill or size.
• KJ Adams: Really athletic freshman that can play some backup center and switch. Long and athletic to
provide some rim protection and rebounding. Skill-level and shooting isn’t quite there.
• Jalen Coleman-Lands: 3 and D guard with some plus length. Doesn’t handle the ball too much and
plays a more limited role off the bench.
• Joseph Yesefu: Can provide some energy as a scorer and annoying point of attack defender. Really
good athlete. Just doesn’t have great size and hasn’t been very efficient.
Scheme
• Play with pace, move the ball from side to side and get to the middle
• Switch 1-4 on the perimeter, deny a lot from one pass away, stunt on drives
• Ice ball screens, force away from middle
Strengths
• Agbaji is such a major weapon with his ability to shoot the ball in a variety of ways, has
a ton of gravity and is someone you can’t help off of
• Really good perimeter defense from the 1-4 spots, have enough size and athleticism
from the 2-4 to do a lot of switching
• They do a really good job of spreading the floor and attacking the rim
• Really good at spacing the floor and using ball screens
• Do a good job at defending pick and roll within their coverage
• They have lineup versatility, can go small and switch everything
• Strong offensive rebounding team
• They have multiple shooters who are really good and a lot of other capable shooters
• They have size on the perimeter defensively, are active and contest shots from deep
• They can work effectively out of the post with McCormack surrounded by shooting,
can also post Wilson
• They get out in transition a lot after defensive rebounds, have a lot of players that can
bring the ball up and attack
Weaknesses
• Can get attacked in mismatches in the post with their switching
• They will play some players that are not good shooting threats
• McCormack has been really inconsistent all season long
• They lack a true lead point guard, can lead to offensive inconsistency and turnovers
• They are a good shooting team but don’t shoot a high rate of attempts from 3
• Some of their lineups feature multiple players that are undersized for their position
• They give up a lot of 3s and also aren’t great at preventing shots at the rim
• They don’t have the best individual shot creators
• They can get beat by backdoor cuts at times
• Teams have had success face guarding Agbaji and taking him out of the game, and
sometimes he can be quieter against better defenders
Evaluation
Kansas is a very good team with one of the best coaches in college basketball. They have one of the
most talented wing duos in the country with Agbaji and Braun. They have really good surrounding pieces
next to them as well. Kansas has primarily won games with their offense. They have great flow within
their actions, move the ball from side to side, and play fast. They have a lot of different players that can
handle the ball, making their offense really dynamic. They also have some very capable shooters,
especially with Agbaji. Everything is mostly designed to get to the middle of the floor, and they do a
good job of that. The side of the floor that Kansas is good but less consistent is on defense. They are
good within their coverages and have some really good personnel on the perimeter. They just have their
moments of missing tags and not containing ball handlers on the perimeter where they get burned.
They are also not the biggest team up and down the lineup, and a lot of size and athleticism can hurt
them at times with their defense. Teams that have success guarding them can do a lot of switching and
have more athletic personnel. Kansas doesn’t have the best players in terms of individual shot creation,
which means that super switchable teams can force Kansas into tougher looks. Remy Martin is an
interesting counter for them but has been inconsistent. This team can also counter some of their issues
with versatility and excellent game planning. Bill Self is not afraid to throw out different lineups and his
teams are always very prepared. Having him is a major asset. This team is good enough to make a Final
Four run, although their defense is likely to cause their downfall if they don’t reach it there.
3.6. Texas Tech
Depth Chart
Coach: Mark Adams
PG: Kevin McCullar | Wing | 6’6” B1: Adonis Arms | Guard | 6’6”
SG: Terrence Shannon Jr. | Wing | 6’6” B2: Clarence Nadolny | Guard | 6’3”
SF: Davion Warren | Wing | 6’6” B3: Mylik Wilson | Guard | 6’3”
PF: Kevin Obanor | Forward | 6’8” B4: Marcos Santos-Silva | Big | 6’7”
C: Bryson Williams | Forward | 6’6” B5: Daniel Batcho | Big| 6’11”
Player Stats

• Kevin McCullar: Fantastic defensive player, makes a ton of plays using his length, very switchable.
Over-tasked offensively, has some shot creation but not enough for the role he’s in.
• Terrence Shannon Jr.: Best pro prospect on the team, talented athlete with really good size and
length. Best at driving on the team, although has some tunnel vision and is very left dominant. Really
good on-ball defender.
• Bryson Williams: Most talented post threat on the team, can act as somewhat of a safety valve. Can
also space to 3. Moves well defensively for someone of his size, although doesn’t have great lift.
• Davion Warren: Wing with decent size, solid spot up shooter and can run some secondary actions.
Good defender on the ball and helpful off the ball with length and activity.
• Kevin Obanor: Good spot up shooter, good in pick and pop. Threat to challenge smaller players in the
post. Decent defensive player, but lack of physical tools can limit his switchability and rim protection.
• Adonis Arms: Good athlete and body type for this team. Playmaker on defense, really good finisher in
transition. Capable shooter and decent catch and go player.
• Clarence Nadolny: Strong guard, has more pick and roll craft than most players on the team. Not much
of a shooter. Good defender at the point of attack.
• Mylik Wilson: Most traditional guard on the team, can run pick and roll and generate some offense.
Provides more of an element of ball-handling. A little slight of frame for the system.
• Marcos Santos-Silva: Strong big, plays much bigger than his size. Good rebounder and decent out on
the perimeter on switches. Not the best finisher around the rim, but good connecting piece.
• Daniel Batcho: More traditional center, decent lob threat and good rim protector. Can attack smaller
players in the post. Most vulnerable to being attacked on switches on the team.
Scheme
• One of the more aggressive no middle teams in college basketball
• No paint touches allowed, really flood to the ball on drives
• Switch 1-5, tons of aggressive help, some scram switching and doubles in the post
• Offensively, some continuity ball screen
Strengths
• Ridiculous how good they are at flying around and helping. Arguably the best team in
college basketball at making full rotations.
• There is real attention to detail defensively. Flying around like they do takes a lot of
understanding and execution from the players
• Tons of length and size. No one in the starting lineup is shorter than 6’6”.
• Insanely difficult to get shots from inside the paint against them
• Excellent at getting out in transition
• Dangerous in taking charges. They foul a lot of really good players out with this.
• Incredible activity, force a ton of turnovers
• Play fairly aggressively, draw a lot of fouls
• Can do some pick and pop with some of their options, Williams can also attack
mismatches if opponents switch
• Can apply some pressure to the rim with their athletes offensively
• Dangerous in transition when they get a lot of steals
• Very good in the post defensively with their doubles and help
Weaknesses
• Players are tasked with doing far too much offensively, they just don’t have great
personnel on that end for creating shots
• General decision making can be an issue for this team, they need more constant ball
movement offensively
• They can struggle to generate their own paint touches
• They give up a ton of threes with how they play
• There are some players that can be exploited in switches more than others
• They can struggle against smaller guards that are quick and have plus passing ability
• Players who can make cross-court reads can punish the aggressiveness of the help
• Not a very good shooting team
• They foul a lot defensively with how aggressive they play
Evaluation
Mark Adams has done a sensational job with this Texas Tech squad. I view them as the best defensive
team in the country, unleashing the most aggressive no-middle scheme I have ever seen. It is almost
impossible to get two feet in the paint against Texas Tech. They will force you baseline and trap the box
with length all day long. The rotations are always there, and at times 5 players will be on the strong side
preventing anything in the middle third of the floor. They have really good personnel on that end too,
rotating through a bunch of wing-sized athletes that execute the scheme. All of their starters are 6’6” or
taller, which is ridiculous at this level. They are a joy defensively. Offense is where they aren’t quite as
good but are getting better. Players are overtasked with responsibility as ball handlers, and this team is
really missing a primary lead guard. They still use their athleticism to get into the paint and make plays
at times, and they have just enough shooting on the perimeter to keep the defense honest. I do have
worries with how their offense looks at times. They can also struggle with really good shooting teams or
quicker playmaking guards. The defense is elite, but the offense is just good. I can see this team making
a Final Four run if shots are falling, but the offense gives me enough pause to where an early upset
wouldn’t be shocking.
3.7. Arkansas
Depth Chart
Coach: Eric Musselman
PG: JD Notae | Guard | 6’1” B1: Devo Davis | Guard | 6’3”
SG: Au’Diese Toney | Wing | 6’6” B2: Chris Lykes | Guard | 5’7”
SF: Stanley Umude | Wing | 6’6” B3: Jaxson Robinson | Wing | 6’7”
PF: Trey Wade | Forward | 6’6” B4: Kamani Johnson | Forward | 6’7”
C: Jaylin Williams | Big | 6’10” B5: Conner Vanover | Big | 7’3”
Player Stats

• Jaylin Williams: Great passer for a big, decent ball handler and finisher. Opens up a ton of different
offensive looks with his passing ability. Good movement skills defensively yet still has good size, really
good overall defender. Should be more aggressive offensively.
• JD Notae: Small shot creating guard, makes a lot of tough shots. Can over dribble at times, but a really
good scorer. Good point of attack defender and great with screen navigation. Doesn’t have great size
and not much of a plus passer.
• Stanley Umude: Great defender on the wing, good athlete. Solid shooter and can slash to the rim. Is
capable of hitting some tough shots, decent offensive option. Very good two-way wing.
• Devo Davis: Shot creating guard with decent size. Solid defender at the point of attack. Shot selection
and playmaking can be questionable, but he can really hit some tough shots.
• Au’Diese Toney: Athletic wing who is arguably the best wing defender on the team. Really versatile
defensively. Limited offensive player, can cut and finish but doesn’t provide much else.
• Trey Wade: Big forward who can guard up positionally. Capable enough shooter to get guarded. Plus
rebounder and good role player. Spends time at the dunker and can finish and get rebounds.
• Chris Lykes: Really undersized guard, great handle and really quick. Good creator off the dribble. Could
be a better playmaker. Annoying at the point of attack, but size holds him back defensively.
• Kamani Johnson: Plays a lot of backup 5. Can defend within the scheme and plays bigger than his size.
Good rebounder and finisher around the rim. Solid athlete on the perimeter.
Scheme
• No-middle defense
• Very fast paced team
• Mostly deep drop with Williams, although can do different stuff with him
Strengths
• Team has a ton of size and athleticism in the new starting lineup, can play really
aggressively at the point of attack
• Williams passing ability opens up a lot of 5-out looks, he’s a high-level passer
• They do a really good job of preventing paint touches. Help is always there, and the
wings and guards do a great job at the point of attack.
• They really push the pace, earning a lot of easy looks. It helps that they generate a
good number of turnovers and grab defensive rebounds.
• Excellent within their drop scheme, Williams combined with the guards is great
• A lot of space to work with for the guards to attack
• Very strong group of shot creating guards with Notae, Lykes, and Davis
• No weak points at the point of attack defensively
• Williams and Wade provide a good amount of rim protection
• Generate a lot of free throws with their space and ability to attack the rim
• Really good at defending in the post, Williams takes a ton of charges and digs are really
good from different spots.
• Good at defending in transition
Weaknesses
• Offense can stagnate with limited plus self-creation, limited high-level pick and roll
operators, and no real post game
• Guards aren’t very good playmakers, a lot of over-dribbling. They can be overtasked
with the creation load.
• Shooting is a major issue for this team. They have sacrificed shooting for really
improving their defense with their lineup combinations.
• Playmaking in pick and roll should be better
• While Williams can switch to some extent, the size of Notae and Lykes doesn’t allow
the team to do a lot of switching
• Players like Lykes are going to get hunted by bigger teams
• They struggle with a lot of off-ball screens
• Limited depth combined low risk for leaving players in with foul trouble
Evaluation
Arkansas is not a team I would want to see in March. They are under-seeded because of how poorly
they started the year, but they have been great ever since Musselman has gone to more defensive
minded lineup combinations. They have been arguably the best defense in the country since that switch
happened, going to super versatile groups with killers at the point of attack and a scheme that everyone
executes really well. They are athletic and long, and their no-middle scheme makes it incredibly difficult
to generate anything in the paint against them. The tradeoff to that is giving up some offense. Less of
Lykes and Davis means less ball handling and shot creation, two things this team lacks. Even with those
two, the offense is good but not great. Williams opens up a lot with his ability to pass from anywhere on
the court, but it doesn’t matter as much if the perimeter players can’t knock down shots. They are also
very reliant on perimeter shot making, which can wane at times. To beat Arkansas, teams need enough
perimeter shooting and high-level playmaking to score enough points or can just prevent them from
scoring at all on the other end and cut out their transition attack. It’s not an easy task. Arkansas is
arguably the best defense in college basketball combined with an offense that may be just good enough.
This might be the most under-seeded and dangerous team in the tournament.
3.8. Kentucky
Depth Chart
Coach: John Calipari
PG: Sahvir Wheeler | Guard | 5’10” B1: Davion Mintz | Guard | 6’3”
SG: TyTy Washington | Guard | 6’3” B2: Jacob Toppin | Forward | 6’9”
SF: Kellan Grady | Wing | 6’5” B3: Lance Ware | Big | 6’9”
PF: Keion Brooks | Forward | 6’7” B4: Daimion Collins | Big | 6’9”
C: Oscar Tshiebwe | Big | 6’9” B5: Bryce Hopkins | Forward | 6’6”
Player Stats

• Oscar Tshiebwe: Great rebounder, arguably the best in the country. Generates a ton of second
chances for his team. Solid defensively with great length and plus movement skills. Good in the post.
Lacks some touch, can get beat on the perimeter, and a good but not great rim protector.
• TyTy Washington: Good ball handler, reads the game well but can also play off the ball. Great in pick
and roll. Good shooter and can hit shots in the midrange. Doesn’t get to the rim a lot. Good defensively.
• Kellan Grady: One of the better shooters in the country. Ridiculous off of movement. Absolutely
causes havoc for opponents. Has enough size and athleticism to be solid defensively.
• Sahvir Wheeler: High-level passer and handler. Can be too aggressive seeking his own shot offensively,
not a 3-point shooter and isn’t a big threat to score. Good point of attack defender but undersized.
• Keion Brooks: Big forward that is athletic and a good shooter in the midrange. Inconsistent from deep.
Defends the other team’s best wing well. Really good play finisher. Can do too much at times
offensively.
• Davion Mintz: Good shooter and can do it off some movement. Not the best ball handler or
playmaker. Arguably their best on-ball defender.
• Jacob Toppin: Really good athlete and play finisher. Uses the athleticism well defensively on the
perimeter and as a secondary rim protector. Not an offensive threat outside of rolling and finishing.
• Lance Ware: Backup center who gives decent minutes protecting the rim and finishing around the
basket. Isn’t asked to do too much.
• Daimion Collins: Incredible athlete. Ridiculous vertical leap and great length. Fluid movement skills.
Still really raw within his skillset, plays a limited role on this team.
• Bryce Hopkins: Strong forward with some perimeter skills. Good frame for his size. Can handle and
shoot it. Foot speed and general traditional athleticism can be an issue for his position.
Scheme
• Drop coverage against pick and roll
• Bring help to the gaps
• Calipari runs his dribble-drive motion offense
Strengths
• Great guard group of different pick and roll weapons with Wheeler, Washington, and
Mintz. They attack different ways and all are good perimeter defenders.
• Tshiebwe grabs an insane number of offensive rebounds, Brooks is also good.
Arguably the best offensive rebounding team in the country.
• Good at finishing around the rim. Players excel in the dribble drive and the big men
are good finishers.
• Modern defenses give up midrange jumpers and Kentucky has the shot-makers to take
and make them
• Really good team in transition offense, they will push hard off misses
• Use of Grady as a movement shooting weapon is really good, fits really well
• They’ve done a very good job of defending in the post, Tshiebwe is really strong an
uses his length well
• Pick and roll coverage is really strong, intersection of a good drop big and guards that
get over screens well
• They do a good job of preventing teams from getting much in the paint
• Good team in the post, they get Tshiebwe in good positions
Weaknesses
• They play a lot of players that are either reluctant shooters or non-shooters
• They live off a difficult shot diet
• They have not gotten great results overall in pick and roll because of their lack of
spacing and Wheeler isn’t a great scorer
• They play small at most positions; they don’t have size and aren’t the most athletically
gifted team
• Outside of Tshiebwe, no one gets to the line very often
• Don’t force turnovers defensively in their scheme
• Teams go really far under Wheeler ball screens and don’t guard him off the ball
• Rim protection can be an issue at times against bigger teams or ones that play a more
spaced-out floor
• They allow a lot of opponent 3s within their gap heavy scheme
• Tshiebwe on the perimeter is not a very good defender
Evaluation
Kentucky started out the season slow but has really picked it to over the back half of the year. This is one
of the most talented teams in the country. They are also one of the most unique teams in terms of how
they are successful. They don’t space the floor very well and shoot a lot in the midrange but grab so
many offensive rebounds they still generate really efficient offense. The guards also do a great job of
playing in tight quarters, hitting floaters, and finding tight passing windows. Kentucky has good shot
makers as well, and the spacing of Kellan Grady is helpful. Pushing it in transition also allows them to
capitalize before the half-court defense gets set. Kentucky has also done well defensively, as they have
good point of attack defense with Tshiebwe doing an admirable job of rim protection. I do worry about
their size on that end of the floor, as Kentucky plays smaller at most positions. Also, if you can attack
Tshiebwe in space, the scheme begins to fall apart. Kentucky also allows a lot of opponent perimeter
shots. I am a little lower than most on Kentucky because I worry about the tough shot diet and reliance
on offensive rebounds. Teams that are much larger can cause them issues, especially if they can knock
down shots from deep. This team is still very much in contention for a Final Four, and a National
Championship would not be shocking. I just don’t see the vision as clearly as others.
3.9. Villanova
Depth Chart
Coach: Jay Wright
PG: Collin Gillespie | Guard | 6’3” B1: Caleb Daniels | Guard | 6’4”
SG: Justin Moore | Guard | 6’4” B2: Bryan Antoine | Wing | 6’5”
SF: Brandon Slater | Wing | 6’6” B3: Chris Arcidiacono | Guard | 6’5”
PF: Jermaine Samuels | Forward | 6’7” B4: Jordan Longino | Guard | 6’5”
C: Eric Dixon | Big | 6’8” B5: Dhamir Cosby-Roundtree | Big | 6’9”
Player Stats

• Collin Gillespie: Arguably the best pick and roll player in college basketball. Can shoot off the dribble
and post smaller guards, generates a ton of offense for this team. Really strong frame and smart player.
Capable defender but lacks some lateral quickness.
• Justin Moore: Really good shooter, can also shoot it off the dribble. Good in pick and roll. Another
smart and strong guard that can work in the post. Good defensively against guards, although can
struggle with quicker matchups.
• Jermaine Samuels: Versatile forward. Can work in the post, good as the roller. Inconsistent shooter.
Good defender, can guard on the perimeter and protect the rim.
• Brandon Slater: Best wing defender on the team, really good athlete. Capable shooter at this point,
can also drive closeouts. Not great with more on-ball responsibilities.
• Eric Dixon: Improved defender throughout the season, is becoming more of a threat offensively. Shot
is inconsistent. Can switch but doesn’t have great lateral quickness. Very strong but undersized.
• Caleb Daniels: Strong bench guard. Good shooter and can run pick and roll. Another guard that can
post up. Guards well on the perimeter but has the same issue with foot speed.
• Bryan Antione: Good defensive guard option off the bench. Not much of a shooter but is a pest
defensively. Plays his role.
• Chris Arcidiacano: Limited role player, can run some pick and roll and can shoot catch and shoot 3s.
Not very good defensively.
Scheme
• Pick and roll heavy motion offense, can also go to 5-out delay looks. They will run a
lot of clock looking for the right shot.
• Gap heavy, pack line team
• Mostly switch 1-4, can also switch at all five spots at times
Strengths
• Really versatile team on both ends of the floor. Can play multiple different styles. They
have a ton of lower body strength up and down the rotation.
• Switching opens up a lot for them. Samuels and Dixon to an extent can defend on the
perimeter and guards are strong enough to defend in the post.
• Excellent execution of defensive scheme. Difficult team to get paint touches against.
• Gillespie is an elite pick and roll ball handler and a matchup problem for most teams.
Big men can also pop, which is a weapon. Hyper elite pick and roll team overall.
• All three guards are really strong, are capable of posting up smaller players.
• Shooting at 4-5 spots on the floor at all times. Multiple players capable of shooting off
the dribble. They get up a lor of looks.
• Excellent free throw shooting team. They also get to the line a good amount.
• Really good at not fouling opponents on drives. Big men do a good job at staying
vertical and contesting shots.
• Good at generating post ups against favorable matchups with options out of it
Weaknesses
• They have a lack of foot speed on the perimeter. They can get burned by quicker
players.
• Teams can help off of reluctant shooters and get good results clogging up their offense
• The heavy gap presence gives up a lot of opposing 3s
• They have almost no depth. Really reliant on starters to carry a massive load.
• They don’t play very big across any position
• They can struggle to get self-generated paint touches at times
• Rarely get easy looks in transition
• They aren’t great at defending in the pick and roll against really good teams
Evaluation
Villanova has consistently been one of the better teams in college basketball for a long time, and this
season has been no different. Jay Wright is the best coach in college basketball in my opinion, as he is
top notch with player development, teaching and execution of scheme, team-specific preparation, and
in-game adjustments. This season, Villanova has been led by offense. They will run through their motion
sets, allowing smart players to make reads. Gillespie is a perfect lead ballhandler for the system. He is
arguably the best pick and roll player in the country, with the ability to punish the defense in every way
possible. Moore as his backcourt mate is a perfect pairing, as he can do some of the same stuff. The
other players understand their roles well, slashing to the rim, setting screens, and spacing the floor. The
utility players have improved offensively throughout the season. While I wouldn’t feel great running
much through them, they are good enough to run secondary actions and get quality results. Defensively,
this Villanova team has a lot of versatility. They can switch, play some drop, or play at the level of
screens. Every player is strong enough to hold their own in different matchups. Villanova does a great
job at teaching denials in the post. They just don’t have a ton of foot speed on the perimeter, plus size,
or real primary rim protection. Bigger and more athletic teams can cause issues for Villanova. Really
good teams at the point of attack defensively can stifle the offense a little. Helping off some of the lesser
threats will do some of the same. This team is versatile, but they are very good in different alignments,
not great. It wouldn’t shock me to see this team succeed in the tournament, but I don’t think they have
the ceiling as some other teams do. Villanova is really good and steady, but not quite great.
3.10. Auburn
Depth Chart
Coach: Bruce Pearl
PG: Zep Jasper | Guard | 6’1” B1: Wendell Green | Guard | 5’11”
SG: K.D. Johnson | Guard | 6’1” B2: Devan Cambridge | Wing | 6’6”
SF: Allen Flanigan | Wing | 6’6” B3: Jaylin Williams | Big | 6’8”
PF: Jabari Smith Jr. | Forward | 6’10” B4: Dylan Cardwell | Big | 6’11”
C: Walker Kessler | Big | 7’1” B5: Chris Moore | Wing | 6’6”
Player Stats

• Jabari Smith Jr.: Unreal shot maker for someone of his size, just shoots over everyone with little
separation. Great perimeter defender, good finisher. Not the best at creating shots at the rim or from
the perimeter but is so big it doesn’t matter sometimes.
• Walker Kessler: Elite rim protector, arguably the best in the country. Moves his feet well enough to
play some different coverages. Capable enough shooter, good hands. Could be stronger finishing around
the rim but has great size and decent touch.
• Wendell Green: Strong guard, undersized but great shooter and crafty finisher. Really good passer,
creative ball handler. Tough point of attack defender. Size does limit him at times and he has been
inconsistent with his decision-making down the stretch.
• K.D. Johnson: Craziest player in college, no one plays with a higher motor than him. Solid shooter,
really good point of attack defender, really attacks. Poor shot selection is part of the package.
• Allen Flanigan: Talented player, good slasher and solid finisher. Capable shooter. Good defender at
the point of attack. Not the athlete he was last year, can force the issue at times.
• Zep Jasper: Good point of attack defender. Doesn’t have great size, but capable in pick and roll and
decent shooter. Limited self-creation but steady as an intiator.
• Devan Cambridge: Super athlete, great two-footed leaper. Good cutter, good wing sized defender.
Not much of a shooter and doesn’t have a ton of perimeter skill.
• Jaylin Williams: Athletic big who can space the floor to some extent. Can move his feet out on the
perimeter, high motor back up.
• Dylan Cardwell: Solid player in pick and roll, good athlete for someone of his frame. Solid rim
protector. Plays really hard. Not a ton of skill but plays within his role.
Scheme
• Decent amount of flex with more modern stuff on offense
• Often denials from one pass away with stunts on drives, can switch 1-4
• Funnel players into Kessler protecting the rim
Strengths
• Really strong pick and roll defense with always having one of Jabari or Kessler on the
back line combined with physical guards
• Kessler and Jabari provide a ton of rim protection, one of the better teams in the
country at defending shots at the rim
• Smith and Kessler are absolute matchup nightmares on both ends of the floor. There
are not a ton of players that can handle Jabari at all.
• Green is very creative in the pick and roll, can generate good offense with his shooting
off the dribble and playmaking
• Green and Johnson do an excellent job of generating paint touches, a lot in transition
but can also use change of pace to attack in the half-court
• Tons of overwhelming athleticism, good size at most groups
• Fantastic guards at the point of attack defensively with Jasper and Johnson
• They bring the pressure defensively, which forces a lot of turnovers
• They run a lot in transition and will really kill you there
• They are capable of overwhelming teams in the paint on offense
Weaknesses
• They have capable shooters, but this is not a good shooting team. They play a decent
number of non-shooters that can really be helped off of.
• They struggle with heavy ball pressure
• Not a ton of plus passing on this team, there are questionable shots taken all the time
• If teams decide to clog the paint by not playing weaker shooters, their offense can stall
• They are fairly reliant on tough shot making
• Sitting on Smith’s right hand and guarding him with size has slowed him down a little
• Prone to a lot of fouls with how aggressive they play
• Their defensive aggression can lead to some open shots
• Ball movement is not very good at times
Evaluation
Auburn has been one of the most fun teams to track all season long. They have an entertaining style of
play with some really fun players. Defensively is where this team primarily excels. They are good at the
point of attack, rotate through a lot of athletes, and have one of the best rim protectors in the country.
Kessler is a safety blanket for this team, allowing them to be more aggressive at the point of attack
within their scheme because they know he’s back there to defend the rim. Offensively, this is a talented
group. Smith is an absolute matchup nightmare, as you need really big and physical yet athletic players
to defend him. Team have figured out to sit on his right hand, but he’s so good at shooting the ball it
doesn’t always matter. They can create offense from the perimeter with their guards, but they are most
effective in transition. I have worries with their offense. Their offense can stagnate if you have someone
that can defend Jabari and force them to play through the guards. Point of attack defense is crucial
against Auburn, but if you have that and completely disregard some of the non-shooters then the
offense is very stoppable. Auburn can struggle with bigger and athletic defensive groups. Against their
defense, your best chance is to pull Kessler away from the rim in some way. If you can do that, they are
more susceptible. The issue is not many teams are capable of pulling that off while being able to defend
this team on the other end. This has been a fun team to watch all season long, but I will end up being a
little bit lower on their title chances than most. I don’t believe in the offense enough quite enough, but
they are going to be a really tough out. Would not surprise me at all to see this group in the Final Four.
4.11. Purdue
Depth Chart
Coach: Matt Painter
PG: Eric Hunter Jr. | Guard | 6’4” B1: Trevion Williams | Big | 6’10”
SG: Sasha Stefanovic | Guard | 6’5” B2: Isaiah Thompson | Guard | 6’1”
SF: Jaden Ivey | Guard | 6’4” B3: Ethan Morton | Forward | 6’6”
PF: Mason Gillis | Forward | 6’6” B4: Brandon Newman | Guard | 6’5”
C: Zach Edey | Big | 7’4” B5: Caleb Furst | Forward| 6’10”
Player Stats

• Jaden Ivey: Monster downhill threat, killer in transition. Can self-create shots in the half-court from
the perimeter. Passing and ball-handling have improved throughout the season, as well as pick and roll
craft. Decent on-ball defender, a little shaky off the ball.
• Trevion Williams: Great working out of the post, arguably the best big man passer in college
basketball and can score on his own. Improved lateral mobility but not much of a rim protector.
• Zach Edey: Uses massive frame well for post scoring and rim protection. Good athlete for size, but
poor laterally. Needs deep position to be successful, a little matchup dependent.
• Sasha Stefanovic: Great shooter, lightning quick release. Can shoot off movement or relocation. Good
without the ball. Can’t do much besides shoot, brutal on the defensive side of the ball.
• Mason Gillis: Tasked as a do-it-all forward, helpful defensive player who moves well for someone of
his body type. Improved 3-point shooter. Limited as a finisher and overall player off the dribble.
• Eric Hunter Jr.: Arguably the best point of attack defender on the team against point guards. Not much
of a threat offensively, handle is fairly loose and isn’t a great shooter.
• Isaiah Thompson: Good shooter, can run a little bit of pick and roll but isn’t tasked to do much.
Passable ball handler but can be overwhelmed by size or heavy pressure. Not very good defensively.
• Ethan Morton: Utility forward, solid defender but not the on-ball stopper Purdue thinks he is. Solid
perimeter shooter, doesn’t do too much off the bounce. High motor.
• Brandon Newman: Inconsistent but very talented, good shooter and has some capabilities of attacking
closeouts. Good defensive player with plus size. Just struggles to read the game at times.
• Caleb Furst: Plus feel for a player of his position, decent enough shooter with a lot of space and plus
rebounder. Not very athletically gifted and doesn’t do quite enough on either end for more minutes.
Scheme
• Very set-based offense, they’ll run something designed almost every time down
• Very much an inside-out style of play. Very few teams post up more than Purdue.
• Play at the level of ball screens with Williams, weakside corner will tag the roller.
Edey plays either at the level or in a high drop.
• Aggressive help in the gaps
Strengths
• Probably the best center pairing in college basketball, 48 minutes of Williams or Edey
drives a lot of the offensive success and is a tough matchup
• Painter is arguably the best X’s and O’s coach in college basketball, great at placing the
big men in advantageous situations
• Ivey is a terror in transition, is also capable of generating self-created paint touches.
Has been unleashed in the half court more offensively, impossible to stay in front of.
• Williams is an exciting player out of the post with his passing ability and ability to score
himself, really tough to double him. Opens up a lot of offensive looks.
• They can really overpower teams that don’t have players to defend in the post
• Spacing is good, a lot of really good spot-up shooters on the floor at most times
• Painter also leverages Stefanovic really well at the offensive end, causes havoc with
screening and cutting
• Get to the line a ton with their best players
• Generally good at preventing shots around the rim within their defensive scheme
• Great rebounding team on both ends
Weaknesses
• Pick and roll defense is really bad with any combination on the floor
• Guards don’t deal well with ball pressure at all, sets can get completely blown up by
teams with enough pressure at the point of attack
• Point of attack defense is really poor with their starting group
• Give up a ton of 3s trying to help from poor perimeter defense
• Edey struggles to move his feet defensively and guards don’t get over screens well
• Offense can really stagnate if the opposing team handles the centers well
• Edey isn’t great at getting post position himself against stockier players, takes up a ton
of space and bogs down the offense in some matchups
• Little rim protection outside of Edey
• Don’t have a 5-man group without holes on one end of the floor
• Never force any turnovers
Evaluation
Purdue is a great regular season team, but I’m not sure they will translate to the setting of March
Madness. Matt Painter is arguably the best X’s and O’s coach in the country, and he truly gets the most
out of his big men. Purdue has the best center rotation in college basketball, and they have one of the
most dynamic perimeter weapons in college basketball with Ivey. Their offense is difficult to stop, but
what holds them back is the defense. The personnel on that end of the floor frankly is not very good.
They don’t have a ton of size outside of one player. The point of attack defense is poor, and the
attention to detail off the ball is lackluster. They are really bad at defending in ball screens, which is
something any team can easily run at them whenever they so choose. Teams have also had a lot of
success with heavy ball pressure and denials from one pass away. Purdue may just be good enough with
their top tier talent that they can squeeze out wins late in the tournament, but they don’t match up well
with some lower seeds. I’d be surprised at a Purdue Final Four run without great matchups or favorable
shooting luck. They don’t have the versatility, but they do have the top tier talent.
4.12. UCLA
Depth Chart
Coach: Mick Cronin
PG: Tyger Campbell | Guard | 5’11” B1: Myles Johnson | Big | 6’11”
SG: Johnny Juzang | Wing | 6’6” B2: Jaylen Clark | Wing | 6’5”
SF: Jules Bernard | Wing | 6’6” B3: David Singleton | Guard | 6’4”
PF: Jaime Jaquez | Forward | 6’6” B4: Peyton Watson | Wing | 6’8”
C: Cody Riley | Big | 6’9” B5: Jake Kyman | Wing | 6’6”
Player Stats

• Johnny Juzang: Tough shot-maker, really good shooter from deep. Can really hit tough 2s in the
midrange. Doesn’t get to the rim and settles, making his efficiency not very impressive. Not a playmaker.
Average defender.
• Jaime Jaquez: Great forward, high IQ player. Good defensively against different assignments. Good
passer. Can shoot and attack off the dribble, but not great with self-creation from the perimeter. Really
good in the post against perimeter players.
• Tyger Campbell: Best playmaker and primary ball handler. Shooting has really improved. Really good
point of attack defender but really undersized. Not a great shot creator.
• Jules Bernard: Wing with good size who can shoot the ball. Hasn’t shot it well this season. Good
defensively, can switch down the lineup. Not great with creation.
• Cody Riley: Versatile big man who is undersized but a good athlete. Can defend on the perimeter,
strong enough to hold his own. Limited rim protector and offensive threat. Doesn’t shoot.
• Myles Johnson: Really good rim protector and post defender. Decent athlete for his size. Really limited
as an offensive player.
• Jaylen Clark: Great role player on the wing. High motor and is good defensively. Very limited to cutting
and finishing offensively, not a shooter. Good positional rebounder.
• Peyton Watson: Athletic wing who is good defensively. Overall has been inconsistent, especially on
offense. Hasn’t fully filled into his role, but very talented player.
• David Singleton: Really good shooter off the bench. Role is limited to just being a shooter, but
Singleton excels in that. Not a bad defender.
Scheme
• Both big men can play in drop, at the level, or hard show on ball screens
• Will do a lot of switching, can switch 1-5 at times
• Deny from one pass away, no-middle defense
Strengths
• Their best perimeter players are all good tough shot makers that are capable of scoring
at 3 levels with Juzang, Jaquez, Campbell, and Bernard. Can create their own shots but
are also good coming off ball screens to score.
• They have really good point of attack defense at all spots. Their wing defenders are all
versatile and can defend guards. They really pressure the ball.
• They do a great job of keeping actions on the perimeter and rotating to prevent shots
at the rim. Shots at the rim are defended well when they are taken.
• They have some defensive versatility. Big men can move their feet on the perimeter,
and they have a lot of plus sized wings.
• Very good defensive rebounding team, they do it by committee
• They are one of the best teams at not turning the ball over. Campbell does a great job.
• Their best groups have four plus shooters on the perimeter offensively
• Very good in transition and get there often because of the defense
• They can get good minutes off the bench. They have good specialists in their roles.
Weaknesses
• A lot of their best players operate best in an inefficient area of the floor and are not
quite good enough at that to consistently generate good offense from the midrange
• Offense has not been as good against better teams. The perimeter players don’t
necessarily get a lot of self-generated paint touches.
• They are reliant on tough shots. Players can hit them but living on a tougher shot diet
can be dangerous.
• Pick and roll defense can be an issue at times if they’re forced to bring two players to
the ball handler, can be attacked with kickouts or by the roll man
• They lack general size without Johnson in the game
• They will give up a lot of 3s within their scheme
• Pick and roll playmaking can be a question. Hitting the roller can be a struggle, and
more aggressive ball screen coverages work well against them.
Evaluation
I wonder what the general perception of UCLA would be if they lost to Michigan State in their First Four
game last year in the NCAA Tournament. I have a feeling people might be lower on this team if not for a
run including a lot of luck (as most do). This UCLA team has brought back all the pieces from last year.
They excel on the defensive side of the ball. They are great at the point of attack and have versatility.
They play a lot of different pick and roll coverages, and during games often switch which coverage they
are playing. They can also switch 1-5 with the size on the wing and the mobility of their centers. It is
difficult to get to the rim against them. Offensively, they have talent. They have a lot of players that can
handle the ball and make tough shots. Multiple players can create their own offense off the dribble.
Most of my concerns with this team are on offense. Against better defenses they can struggle. They are
reliant on tougher shots, and better defenses will force them into that more often and do a better job at
contesting. I wish they were better at getting into the lane and generating looks that way. I also don’t
think Mick Cronin is great as an offensive coach. Defensively, my biggest concern is the lack of interior
size at times when Johnson is on the bench. However, with Johnson in the game they don’t have as
much versatility. This is still a very good team. Versatile defense that’s great at the point of attack with
multiple ball handlers that can really hit shots is a good formula for winning. I still have some questions
about how they scale against the very best teams, but they are capable of making another run.
4.13. Tennessee
Depth Chart
Coach: Rick Barnes
PG: Kennedy Chandler | Guard | 6’0” B1: Zakai Zeigler | Guard | 5’9”
SG: Santiago Vescovi | Guard | 6’3” B2: John Fulkerson | Big | 6’9”
SF: Josiah-Jordan James | Wing | 6’6” B3: Justin Powell | Guard | 6’6”
PF: Brandon Huntley-Hatfield | Forward | 6’10” B4: Victor Bailey | Guard | 6’4”
C: Uros Plavsic | Big | 7’0” B5: Jonas Aidoo | Big | 6’11”
Player Stats

• Kennedy Chandler: High-level point of attack defender, real on-ball pest who executes the scheme
well. Good ball handler and playmaker, good change of pace, but undersized and limited shooter. Has
been getting better throughout the season.
• Santiago Vescovi: Good shooter and adept at attacking closeouts. Good within the offense, very
interesting on and off ball player. Not a great athlete which limits him, but isn’t a bad defender.
• Josiah-Jordan James: Strong wing who is good defensively on the ball, strong in help as well. Has
struggled a little as a shooter this season but has been a capable shooter for his career.
• John Fulkerson: Versatile offensive big, can run at the 5 and open up some lineups. Solid passer and
can do well in the post against smaller players. Below average defensively, especially at the 5.
• Zakai Zeigler: Really small guard but strong frame, good shooter, good ball handler, and very good
playmaker. Great at the point of attack defensively. Size just holds him back.
• Brandon Huntley-Hatfield: Athletic forward who gives them real defensive versatility. Can give them a
change of tempo and can guard on the perimeter or help protect the rim. Not a shooter.
• Justin Powell: Versatile guard offensive. Has good size and can handle the ball. Also, a capable shooter
with range on the jumper. Not great defensively within the scheme, but capable with his size.
• Uros Plavsic: Massive frame, not very agile but big enough to protect the rim when in position. Not
versatile defensively. Fine post threat with some moves, isn’t a threat on the perimeter.
• Victor Bailey: 3 and D guard, plays within his role and isn’t asked to do too much offensively. Not great
at putting the ball on the deck and you’d prefer he’d be taller for his role.
• Jonas Aidoo: Big Freshman that is getting minutes due to injuries. Solid athlete and can finish around
the rim. Good rim protector. Fairly raw in terms of decision-making, but brings good energy.
Scheme
• Very aggressive help within the gaps, don’t want anyone to get paint touches
• Aggressive on the ball defensively, makes life difficult on opposing ball handlers
• A lot of 3 out 2 in, can do some delay with the centers and Fulkerson as well
• Also, some 5-out stuff with Fulkerson at the 5
• Will play a lot of drop coverage
Strengths
• Defense accomplishes the goal of the scheme. It’s tough to score in the paint.
• Chandler and Zeigler are really good guards who can make plays off the dribble and are
really difficult to contain to the perimeter
• Excellent at defending pick and rolls with active guards and oversized big men
• A lot of talent on the perimeter. A good amount of shooting and ball handling with the
right lineup combinations.
• Really strong point of attack defense at the point guard spot. Also have some plus
point of attack defenders at other spots on the floor.
• They have a good amount of lineup versatility with their personnel.
• They have a ton of size in the frontcourt
• Their aggressive defense forces a lot of turnovers
• Heavy offensive rebounding team, overwhelming interior size for some teams
• They do a good job of swinging the ball from side to side to get good looks
• Prevent shots at the rim and also protect the rim when opponents get there
• Really good at defending in the post
Weaknesses
• The spacing in a lot of the lineups isn’t very good. Often the 3 out 2 in with two non-
shooters on the inside bogs down the offense.
• They can struggle against teams that have a lot of length on the perimeter
• Fulkerson and Plavsic are not very scheme versatile defensively. A lot of their lineup
combinations are going to give up either spacing or defense.
• They don’t have great perimeter shot creators outside of the two point guards
• A little over-reliant on post ups despite not having great personnel to do that
• They will allow a lot of 3s within their scheme
• They do not play well in the post at all
• Chandler and Zeigler aren’t great at scoring themselves in pick and roll
Evaluation
Tennessee is difficult from an evaluation standpoint for me. They often will give up spacing and overall
offense for the benefit of more defense. They will play massive frontcourt players that help the defense
while limited the offense. They are one of the better defenses in college basketball through ball
pressure, helping in the gaps, and shutting off the rim. They have an elite defense with no weak
defenders in the rotation. The guard play on this team is really strong. The Freshman guards are really
tough to contain on the perimeter and are both fun playmakers. They manufacture paint touches.
Vescovi is a little under the radar in terms of how good he is. My issue is the spacing just isn’t quite
there. Bigger teams can give them issues within their offense. They also post up a good amount despite
not having the personnel for that. The shooting overall isn’t bad, but it isn’t a plus. They have some
lineup versatility and have played smaller lineups, but those give up more defensively. I worry about
what this team looks like against athletic teams that can match their interior size. Teams that can really
shoot put pressure on their gap-heavy defense. I also worry about the ability of their offense in general
if they aren’t getting a lot in transition. They have a decent ceiling with the defense, guard play, and
some shooters. They could also lose early against a bigger team with shooting. Elite defense with guards
that can get paint touches and shoot is a good pitch meeting. They are capable of making a run.
4.14. LSU
Depth Chart
Coach: Kevin Nickelberry
PG: Xavier Pinson | Guard | 6’2” B1: Tari Eason | Forward | 6’8”
SG: Brandon Murray | Guard | 6’5” B2: Eric Gaines | Guard | 6’2”
SF: Mwani Wilkinson | Wing | 6’5” B3: Alex Fudge | Forward | 6’8”
PF: Darius Days | Forward | 6’7” B4: Justice Williams | Wing | 6’3”
C: Efton Reid | Big | 6’11” B5: Shareef O’Neal | Forward | 6’10”
Player Stats

• Tari Eason: Physically imposing player, great defense on the ball across multiple positions and causes
trouble off it. Good slasher, very right hand dominant and shot is inconsistent.
• Darius Days: Switchable defender with a really strong frame. Hurts smaller players on offense, also has
some shooting ability. Doesn’t create a ton of easy looks, shot selection can be questionable.
• Eric Gaines: Defensive playmaker, good length and activity defensively. Talented against point of
attack. Can create some shots and run pick and roll, not a great shooter.
• Xavier Pinson: Best individual shot creator, capable of shooting off the dribble. Solid on-ball defender,
but not as impactful on that end as a lot of other players.
• Mwani Wilkinson: Really good wing defender, also works really well off the ball. Causes havoc on that
end. Solid slasher offensively, not asked to do too much and could be a better shooter.
• Brandon Murray: Smart defensive player, good frame and can guard multiple spots. Capable shooter
and can do some stuff off the dribble. Not a great shot creator.
• Efton Reid: Slowest of the bunch, can get hurt a little defensively on switches despite having decent
movement skills. Solid in the post and on rolls, decent rim protector.
• Alex Fudge: Great physical tools, makes a lot of jaw-dropping plays on defense. Can attack closeouts
and finish with athleticism at the rim, although decision-making and shooting is questionable.
• Justice Williams: Athletic wing, very limited offensive role. Fits the group defensively, strong frame
and good switching on the perimeter, can guard up positions.
Scheme
• Switch 1-5, triple switch to get smaller players out of tough matchups
• Play the gaps very aggressively, do not want anyone getting into the paint
• Heavily push the ball in transition
Strengths
• Incredibly tough to generate any shots against their defense, they’re so good
within their scheme and have great personnel to execute
• Tons of defensive activity, super athletic bunch. Force a ton of turnovers.
• Great defensive versatility, some of their bigger players can really switch out onto the
perimeter and kill actions from opposing teams
• Incredibly difficult to get anything at the rim against them, they also are really good at
closing out to shooters after helping
• Really dangerous in transition, defensive activity creates situation for runouts.
Athleticism shines in this aspect.
• Physically imposing offensive players with some skilled guards, have some level of rim
pressure and creativity from different spots
• Really good at getting offensive rebounds and finishing putbacks
• Great in transition defense with their athletes and motor
• Despite some smaller lineups, don’t allow a ton in the post, really dig down and help
Weaknesses
• Poor team in terms of creation for others, no real high-level playmakers. Not very
good at all in pick and roll or isolation.
• Not a ton of creation off the dribble for others, offense can get ugly at times
• Shooting can be a massive concern for this group
• Offensive creativity can be lacking in terms of sets
• Efton Reid can be attacked on switches against a lot of guards
• They give up a ton of 3s to opponents, which causes real issues at times
• There is the occasional miscommunication on defense, and it really gets exposed
because of the scheme
• Not very good at defensive rebounding
• They foul a lot, often putting their best players in trouble
• Really high turnover team because of the lackluster sets and players over-tasked
Evaluation
LSU is one of the more difficult evaluations of any team in the field. They look the part of a near top-5
team in the country at times, with brilliant defense and overwhelming athleticism on offense. They also
look the part of a non-tourney team at times, with stagnant offense and miscommunication on defense.
Their coach also just got fired. I’m willing to bet on the ceiling of this team. Their defense is ridiculous
when clicking right. You can’t score at all inside the arc against them. They have a ton of length and
switchability. They are probably the most physically gifted team in the country. The offense is what
holds them back from being a great team. The ball doesn’t move at times, and many players are
overtasked with a creation burden they can’t quite carry. Their best work is in transition, and if they can
get enough stops that’s good enough to carry them to victories. There are moments when the offense
looks good if the best players are playing well. They have a lot more offensive talent than their offensive
ranking would suggest. This team has the pieces to go on a run. Versatility, great players, good scheme.
They are also inconsistent enough that they could lose before the second weekend. Teams that have
plus passing and can really shoot tend to give LSU troubles. Teams that aggressively help from the
perimeter and have good size also give them some troubles. I wouldn’t be surprised to see this team
lose in the first round, but I also wouldn’t be surprised to see them in the Final Four. They have that
much talent and are that good defensively.
5.15. Virginia Tech
Depth Chart
Coach: Mike Young
PG: Storm Murphy | Guard | 6’0” B1: Darius Maddox | Wing | 6’5”
SG: Hunter Cattoor | Guard | 6’3” B2: David N’Guessan | Forward | 6’9”
SF: Nahiem Alleyne | Wing | 6’4” B3: Sean Pedulla | Guard | 6’1”
PF: Justyn Mutts | Forward | 6’7” B4: John Ojiako | Forward | 6’10”
C: Keve Aluma | Big | 6’9” B5: Jalen Haynes | Forward | 6’8”
Player Stats

• Keve Aluma: Really good two-way player. Excellent movement skills, allows him to be versatile
defensively. Really good rebounder. Capable shooter. Can make a lot of passes and reads. Really good
footwork in the post, good touch with either hand.
• Justyn Mutts: Another really good two-way player. Athletic and has a strong frame. Versatile
defender, great on the perimeter or in the post. Good rim protector. Really good rebounder. Smart
player, excellent passer. Can score in the post.
• Hunter Cattoor: Ridiculous shooter. Movement shooter that has a ton of range on the shot. Good size
for his role. Excellent cutter. Is not used much on the ball but plays within his role. Smart player, solid
defender but athleticism holds him back there.
• Nahiem Alleyne: Great 3 and D role player. Lefty that can really hit shots. Athletic enough to attack
some closeouts and make plays. Good defender on the perimeter with a lot of versatility.
• Strom Murphy: Will initiate a lot of offense but is also used a lot off the ball. Excellent shooter and
good playmaker. Is quick and can get to the rim, crafty player. Lack of size and athleticism can limit him
on both ends at times.
• Darius Maddox: Fantastic shooter off the bench. Has good size and length, solid athlete. Allows him to
play in a 3 and D role. Has range on the shot and makes a ton off movement.
• David N’Guessan: Athletic forward off the bench. Good cutter, probably the least threatening shooter
in the rotation. Provides some rim protection and can defend on the perimeter.
• Sean Pedulla: Guard off the bench, another really good shooter. Can make some plays, but not quite
as good within their system as other guards. Makes some mistakes. Undersized and not a great athlete.
Scheme
• Spread out offense that allows the player to make reads out of concepts and basic
alignments.
• Pack line defense with heavy help in the gaps
• Versatile pick and roll coverage, will mostly play at the level
Strengths
• Ridiculously difficult offense to prepare for. They play so well out of reads and have
such great flow that they can attack any defensive style.
• Really smart team overall. Fantastic with cutting, ball movement, and passing.
• Great shooting team. 7 of their 8 rotation players are threats to shoot. They play 4
really dangerous shooters in Cattoor, Murphy, Maddox, and Pedulla.
• Great passing team. Two of their better passers start at the 4 and 5. No ball stoppers
on the team.
• They are a low turnover team offensively despite their style of play
• Aluma and Mutts are both threats to score in the post. It is very difficult to double
them with the surrounding shooting and their passing ability.
• They do a solid job in their defensive scheme of keeping the ball outside the paint
• They have some defensive versatility with their frontcourt. The frontcourt is very
athletic and can guard all over the floor, as well as protect the rim.
• Fantastic in ball screens. They run a lot of empty side actions that kill teams. They have
ridiculous shooters off the dribble and big men that can finish and short roll.
• They defend ball screens well with their coverages, back line does a really good job
• Incredible at setting and using a variety of flare, pin downs, and exit screens
• They defend well without fouling
• Good rebounding team overall
Weaknesses
• The backcourt point of attack defense with two of Murphy, Cattoor, and Pedulla
always on the court makes it difficult to build a great defense
• Self-created paint touches from the perimeter players could be an issue for this team.
They do not always get a lot of looks from the inside besides post ups and cuts.
• They will give up some good looks from 3 within their defensive scheme
• They may struggle a bit with elite post players with a lack of true size and strength on
the interior
• Ball handlers can struggle with heavy ball pressure at times
Evaluation
Virginia Tech is built for the gauntlet of March Madness. They have arguably the most gorgeous
offensive system in the country. They have such smart players that are allowed to play out of concepts
and alignments, and they do so really well. It is opened up by the ridiculous shooting and fantastic
passing. They are also a really good cutting team. They have elements of false motion and randomness
within their offense that makes it really difficult to prepare for. Defensively, they have an excellent
frontcourt rotation. They have versatility with their size and athleticism. They guard multiple spots up or
down the positional spectrum. Rim protection and rebounding are a plus for them despite not having
great size. I love the way this team scales to March, but I do have some concerns. They are not great at
generating paint touches from anything outside of cuts and post ups. That means their offense can stall
a little if shots aren’t falling from deep. Defensively, it is tough to build a good defense with the
backcourt they have. They just don’t have a lot of size or athleticism there. They might also struggle
against great post players with their frontcourt lacking a little bit of size. I still really like this team, and I
think they’ve figured out how to play in their system and have their rotation nailed down. They are
smart, difficult to game plan for, and have an excellent coach. Virginia Tech can make a serious run.
5.16. Houston
Depth Chart
Coach: Kelvin Sampson
PG: Jamal Shead | Guard | 6’1” B1: Ramon Walker Jr. | Guard | 6’4”
SG: Kyler Edwards | Guard | 6’4” B2: J’Wan Roberts | Forward | 6’7”
SF: Taze Moore | Wing | 6’5” B3: Reggie Chaney | Forward | 6’8”
PF: Fabian White | Forward | 6’8” B4: Ja’Vier Francis | Forward | 6’8”
C: Josh Carlton | Big | 6’11” B5: Robbie Armbrester | Guard | 6’4”
Player Stats

• Kyler Edwards: Has taken on much more creation burden with injuries, overtasked. Still a solid ball
handler and good shooter. Wish he was more aggressive downhill. Strong defender on guards and can
guard up the lineup.
• Fabian White: Has turned into a really good piece. Shooting improvement has been ridiculous. Solid
athlete. Capable of switching. Good finisher.
• Taze Moore: Incredible athlete. Can hit some really tough shots but is overtasked with creation. Great
defender on the ball. Not a great shooter, limited playmaker
• Jamal Shead: Best playmaker of the guards. Not an efficient scorer or self-creator. Best as a passer.
Good defensively as well.
• Josh Carlton: Good center who fits the scheme. Solid athlete, monster rebounder. Solid rim protector.
Not too much of an offensive threat outside of a roll man.
• Ramon Walker Jr.: Spots up on the perimeter and plays defense. Has not been able to hit shots this
season. Really high motor. Great job within his defensive role. Can be over-ambitious offensively.
• J’Wan Roberts: Ridiculous rebounder for his size. His role is to chase rebounds and play defense. Does
that really well. Good athlete, but overall skill level is lacking.
• Reggie Chaney: Backup big, comes in to play defense and set screens. Solid within his role. Good
finisher around the rim, decent with rim protection and good athlete.
Scheme
• Ultra-aggressive defensively
• No middle defense
• Flat coverage on ball screens, really good at tagging
• Aggressively go after offensive rebounds
Strengths
• Arguably the best team in the country at pick and roll defense, combination of guards
getting over screens, big men executing, and rotations are fantastic
• They make life incredibly difficult for the other team, they are full of really good point
of attack defenders in Shead, Edwards, and Moore
• Incredibly athletic team, I’m not sure if any full team plays harder
• Great at preventing and contesting shots at the rim
• Ridiculously good at going after offensive rebounds
• Big men are athletic and can get out on the floor, recover, and protect the rim
• They are capable of hitting shots, usually play 4 players who can shoot it
• Get out in transition a lot, really tough to stop there
• Force a lot of turnovers and block a lot of shots by flying around
• Do not allow second chances or opportunities in transition
• Solid at running spread pick and roll
Weaknesses
• Shot creation could be a lot better, they can take some tough shots at times. Edwards
and Moore are good, but not as primaries.
• Guards aren’t great at being primary handlers, can struggle with ball pressure
• Shooting isn’t great, players are capable but not necessarily good
• Poor free throw shooting team
• They commit a ton of fouls and don’t generate fouls for the other team
• They don’t have much depth
• They give up a lot of 3s within their scheme
• Not a very good halfcourt offensive team, reliant on transition
• They post up some without a lot of success
Evaluation
I really like Houston. I’m comfortable saying Houston would be around a top 3-6 team for me… if Marcus
Sasser and Tramon mark didn’t get hurt. Those are arguably their two best players, and injuries to those
two have killed their hopes at a national championship. However, the foundation is still there of a good
team. Houston is excellent defensively. No teams’ culture is felt more on a possession-to-possession
basis than that of this Houston team. They fly around, contest every pass and shot, and make life
impossibly difficult for the opponent. They want to make games ugly. It is really difficult to get two feet
in the paint against this team. The offense has been surprisingly good since their injuries. Players such as
Shead, Edwards, Moore, and White have really stepped up. They are a ridiculous offensive rebounding
team. I still worry about what it looks like in a tournament setting against good defensive teams.
Houston just doesn’t have the creation it needs to succeed against teams that don’t allow them to get
out in transition and can match their athleticism. Their offense can get very stagnant, resulting in
overtasked guards trying to create space and shoot shots they are unlikely to make. If all player’s
responsibilities were slightly less on offense, they’d all be in perfect roles. Unfortunately, that isn’t how
the season has played out. Houston is still a good team. Anyone that struggles with ball pressure or
defensive rebounding will have a rough time. Teams need dynamic guards and shooting to beat
Houston, or just good defense. It wouldn’t shock me at all for Houston to get some favorable matchups
and shooting luck and make a run. However, because of their offense, this team could struggle to make
it to the second weekend.
5.17. Connecticut
Depth Chart
Coach: Dan Hurley
PG: R.J. Cole | Guard | 6’1” B1: Tyler Polley | Wing | 6’9”
SG: Tyrese Martin | Wing | 6’6” B2: Jalen Gaffney | Guard | 6’3”
SF: Andre Jackson | Wing | 6’6” B3: Akok Akok | Big | 6’9”
PF: Isaiah Whaley | Forward | 6’9” B4: Jordan Hawkins | Wing | 6’5”
C: Adama Sanogo | Big | 6’9” B5: Sanson Johnson | Forward | 6’10”
Player Stats

• R.J. Cole: Small guard who generates a lot of offense out of pick and roll. Good shooter off the dribble
and good passer. Annoying point of attack defender, but size holds him back. Still has a strong enough
frame and high motor to compete with bigger players.
• Tyrese Martin: Shot creating guard with a lot of size, can post smaller guards. Good shooter. Really
good point of attack defender. Shot selection could be better.
• Isaiah Whaley: Really good rim protector, can also switch onto the perimeter. One of the better
defensive players from the conference. Good finisher and improved skill, but is not strong there.
• Andre Jackson: Unbelievable athlete in terms of speed and leaping, turns that into being a great wing
defender. Good cutter and finisher, but underwhelming shooter and perimeter playmaker. Has some
good passing flashes.
• Adama Sanogo: High usage post player, solid in that aspect but not good enough to carry the load he’s
asked to carry. Struggles against bigger players. Solid defensive player but doesn’t have plus size or
perimeter athleticism.
• Tyler Polley: Really impressive shooter for someone of his size, capable of taking one dribble and
pulling up as well. Good size, but he doesn’t have enough creation juice or athleticism for more usage.
• Jalen Gaffney: Good point of attack defender, solid shooter and ball handler. Not great at anything,
but solid backup guard.
• Akok Akok: Capable of shooting and defending the rim, good athlete. Has some perimeter defense
ability. Not highly skilled and could be more aware.
• Jordan Hawkins: Talented player who is putting it together, good shooter and decent ball handler.
Good frame and solid athlete. Makes some mistakes on both ends as a younger player.
Scheme
• Deny from one pass away, contest every catch
• Don’t bring a ton of help, trust their players to defend more one on one
• Often at the level of ball screens in a flat or hard hedge
Strengths
• Incredibly athletic group, especially at the wing and forward spots. A ton of size at
those spots as well, even off the bench they have size.
• Great defensive personnel in Martin, Jackson, and Whaley. Scary group to play against
on the wing, one of the better defensive trios in the country.
• Very good overall with rim protection, elite secondary rim protectors
• Great pick and roll defense
• Point of attack defense at the guard spots is good as well
• Fairly talented shooters at multiple spots, all can attack closeouts as well
• Really good at contesting shots all around the floor
• Good with drive and kicks, decent enough rim pressure with a lot of their players
• Cole controls the tempo of the game well, generates good stuff in pick and roll
• Really good offensive rebounding team
Weaknesses
• I really don’t understand the intentions of the offense, Sanogo takes up space, isn’t
great in the post, and it doesn’t make sense to play through him
• Sanogo is not great defensively, holding back a super versatile group with lack of rim
protection and perimeter movement skills
• Shot creation ability in general is not great with more defensive minded wings
• Pick and roll defense should be a lot better for their personnel
• Sanogo can’t make a passing read out of the post at all
• Shooting can be a concern with their starting frontcourt
• Too much Cole usage at times, especially late in games
• Commit a lot of fouls defensively
• They don’t allow opponent shots from 3 at the expense of giving shots at the rim
• They aren’t great at defending in the post
Evaluation
UConn is arguably the most athletic team in the country. They play really big at a lot of different spots,
and the versatility comes with what these players can do defensively. The combination of Martin,
Jackson, and Whaley might be the best defensive trio in all of college basketball. Those three can play up
or down the positional spectrum, are excellent athletes, and very strong. What holds them back
defensively is the two players next to them. Cole is strong at the point of attack yet undersized. Sanogo
is undersized and is limited with foot speed and rim protection ability. Their bench has long, athletic
players that can fit into their defensive scheme. It’s really tough to score against this group one on one,
and teams really have to work to bring Sanogo into the action and attack them that way to succeed.
Offensively, this team has its moments. They get a ton of their offense from offensive rebounds. They
have some players who can handle the ball along with some talented shot makers. The shooting is a real
question, but this team can hang with anyone if the questionable shooters (Jackson and Whaley) are
knocking down shots. I would feel better is Sanogo wasn’t involved as much overall. I get they need him
to generate offense, but he holds them back defensively and just isn’t that great of an offensive player
anyways. I think their reliance on him will hold them back in March. Athletic teams with size that can run
spread pick and roll all day long should be able to contend with UConn. I don’t trust the offensive system
or Sanogo as the defensive center enough to be as high on this team as I want to be. I still feel good
about them potentially making noise as a second weekend team.
5.18. Alabama
Depth Chart
Coach: Nate Oats
PG: Jahvon Quinerly | Guard | 6’1” B1: JD Davison | Guard | 6’3”
SG: Jaden Shackelford | Guard | 6’3” B2: Noah Gurley | Forward | 6’8”
SF: Keon Ellis | Wing | 6’6” B3: Darius Miles | Wing | 6’6”
PF: Juwan Gary | Forward | 6’6” B4: James Rojas | Forward | 6’8”
C: Charles Bediako | Big | 7’0” B5: Jusaun Holt | Wing | 6’6”
Player Stats

• Jaden Shackelford: Talented shot-maker, makes a ton of difficult looks off the dribble. Good at
leveraging shooting into paint touches. Really crafty offensive weapon. Could be a better playmaker and
defense is not great.
• Jahvon Quinerly: Really crafty on the ball, decent passer with both hands. Shooting has been
inconsistent, but he does have some versatility there. Has not been quite as good this season, but still
has great moments. Good at getting in the paint. Defense is poor.
• Keon Ellis: Athletic wing who is the best defensive player on the team, switchable with length. Solid
shooter and slasher, but a little too shot-happy at times.
• JD Davison: Ultra-athletic guard, has a ton of bounce and quick first step. Solid passer, gets into the
paint well. Good point of attack defender. Shooting and decision-making hold him back.
• Charles Bediako: Good size and solid athlete for a big, good vertical threat offensively. Not a great
finisher, could stronger. Good length but can be inconsistent defensively.
• Juwan Gary: Solid connecting piece, decent shooter and can guard a couple of different positions
defensively. Isn’t asked to do too much.
• Noah Gurley: Similar in role to Gary, has a little more size to guard up the lineup. Can play small ball 5.
• Darius Miles: 3 and D wing, solid length and good athlete, active defensively. Decision-making leaves
some to be desired.
• James Rojas: Thicker frame than the other fringe big men, capable shooter from deep but not reliable.
Doesn’t have great lateral movement but good rebounder and post defender, limited athlete.
Scheme
• A lot of 4-out 1-in, heavy emphasis on spacing. Use the dunker very well and both
corners are always filled.
• Push the ball very heavily in transition
• Very pick and roll heavy offense
• Only 3s and shots at the rim
Strengths
• Spread the floor really well, opening up angles to attack the rim for Shackelford and
Quinerly. Both are excellent in that regard in different ways.
• Dynamic guard trio drives the pick and roll heavy offense. Each of Quinerly,
Shackelford, and Davison have different strengths, creating a dynamic attack.
• Pushing the pace gets them a lot of easy looks
• They can generate a lot of paint touches, which is the main idea of their offense.
Generate a ton of drive and kick looks.
• Their ability to create paint touches also makes them good at scoring in the paint,
guards are good with lobs and drop downs as well
• No team is better at making that skip pass to the weakside corner, they also set a good
number of random screens to open up shooters
• Aggressive defensively, have some length and activity up and down the roster
• Really good at getting to the free throw line from attacking closeouts
• Multiple players who can shoot it off of movement and attack closeouts
Weaknesses
• They don’t have great shooting at enough positions for a lot of what they want to do,
they take tough shots and miss a lot from deep
• Point of attack defense is suspect with Quinerly and Shackelford in the game together
• Undersized for the way they play defensively, not a super athletic group either. Can
struggle with bigger/longer teams
• Reliant on shot-making, offense can go from great to good when shots aren’t falling at
their normal rate. Result of shooting so many 3s.
• Center position is a weak point for this team with Bediako being inconsistent
• They foul a lot defensively, result from poor point of attack defense
• Not a very good defensive rebounding team
Evaluation
Alabama is one of the toughest evaluations in all of college basketball. They have shown to be capable
of beating really good teams while also not looking good at all against many lesser opponents. This is
somewhat by design. Alabama naturally has a high level of variation because they shoot so many shots
from deep. Despite theoretically having good shooters, a lot of their players just haven’t shot the ball
very well from deep this season. They have dynamic guards that can get their own shots and get two
feet in the paint, which helps bolster their offense when shots aren’t falling. They utilize the space of the
court better than almost any team in college basketball. When shots are falling, they can hang with
anyone. They are a tough matchup for more traditional teams with their style of play. The larger issue
for Alabama has been on defense. They have been inconsistent on that end of the floor, lacking size and
high-level defense on the interior and at the point of attack. Their defense is by no means bad, but it
doesn’t scale very well at times to better opponents. The players execute their scheme well, but the
players themselves have limitations. Alabama can counter this with lineup versatility, but there is a give
and take with that and offensive continuity. This Alabama team is capable of making a run, but that is
reliant on perimeter shot making and matchups. They can give good teams problems, but they also give
bad teams hope. I have no idea what this team will do in the tournament, but the ceiling is there.
5.19. Illinois
Depth Chart
Coach: Brad Underwood
PG: Trent Frazier | Guard | 6’2” B1: Andre Curbelo | Guard | 6’1”
SG: Alfonso Plummer | Guard | 6’1” B2: Coleman Hawkins | Forward | 6’10”
SF: Da’Monte Williams | Wing | 6’3” B3: Benjamin Bosmans-Verdonk | Big | 6’8”
PF: Jacob Grandison | Wing | 6’6” B4: Luke Goode | Wing | 6’7”
C: Kofi Cockburn | Big | 7’0” B5: Omar Payne | Big | 6’10”
Player Stats

• Kofi Cockburn: Massive big, matchup issue for teams that don’t have a big physical center. Great at
using his strength advantage, has improved his interior footwork. Really good rim protector. Not great
movement skills on the perimeter, not great against similarly sized players.
• Trent Frazier: Two-way guard who is a pest on the ball defensively. Can handle the ball and is a good
shot maker. Initiates a lot of offense well but is really good off the ball. Doesn’t get to the rim a ton.
• Andre Curbelo: Creative guard, good passer and fun finisher. Not much of a threat to shoot the ball.
Undersized, which can limit him on defense but generally good at the point of attack on guards.
• Alfonso Plummer: Ridiculous shooter. Does a ton off movement, a lot of elevation to get shots off.
Doesn’t do much else on either end, but shooting is absolutely elite.
• Da’Monte Williams: Nice 3 and D wing, guards the other team’s best wing player. Good role player
and ball mover, capable shooter. Really limited offensively on the ball.
• Jacob Grandison: Another 3 and D wing. Has more size defensively and a solid shooter. Limited on the
ball offensively.
• Coleman Hawkins: Big forward who has some skill. Capable shooter and solid mover defensively, can
provide secondary rim protection. Slow processing at times holds him back.
• Luke Goode: Connector offensively who is a good shooter. Good size to play as a wing or forward
defensively. Not a ton of stuff on the ball offensively.
• Omar Payne: Can play backup big in a more versatile role. Can play some different coverages. Also a
capable shooter.
Scheme
• Drop coverage with Kofi Cockburn
• Pack line scheme
• 4 out 1 in, generally shooting around one big center
Strengths
• Four shooters around a big center is a good formula for generating offense, makes it
difficult to double Cockburn
• Force a ton of midrange attempts defensively. Really don’t allow shots in the paint and
get out to contest 3s. One of the more analytically inclined teams with Underwood.
• They do a good job within their drop coverage, especially when Frazier is the one
fighting over the screen. Cockburn is a great rim protector.
• Multiple players who are capable of on-ball creation in Curbelo and Frazier
• Cockburn is one of the more physically imposing players in the country, tough matchup
for most teams. Improved footwork around the rim.
• Really good shooting team in general, Plummer and Frazier are real issues for teams
that help more aggressively
• Really good offensive rebounding team
• Underwood runs some really interesting sets with their shooters and to give space for
Cockburn to operate
Weaknesses
• When Cockburn plays against another center that can match his size, he doesn’t have
nearly as much success
• Cockburn’s limited movement skills forces them to play drop, which is not always the
greatest coverage against some teams
• Outside of Cockburn, they are fairly undersized and not too athletic
• When Curbelo plays, it can mess up the offense a little bit and limit the flow and
shooting around Cockburn
• There are some lesser threats such as Williams that teams are willing to help off of
• They don’t force very many turnovers defensively
• They don’t push the ball in transition much at all, not very effective there
• Not very good at defending in transition
• Not a very athletically gifted team
Evaluation
Illinois is a good Big Ten team that I think could struggle to get through the gauntlet of March Madness.
They are more built for Big Ten play, being a physical team that grinds down offensive possessions and
plays primarily through a big center. If a team doesn’t have a center that can defend Cockburn in the
post, it is going to be difficult to scheme your defense. You have to bring doubles, but Illinois has enough
good spot up shooters that it can be hard to do. You’d preferably double from different angles, but
execution at this level can be difficult. Curbelo adds another element to the offense when healthy, but
he also takes away from what this team does best. The decision-making isn’t always great, and he isn’t
much of a shooter. At times, Illinois looks better with Frazier as the lead guard. Defensively, Illinois
doesn’t have a ton of size outside of Cockburn. He does a good job defending the rim in drop and
providing help. Teams that can bring him out to the perimeter more with screens and shooting should
be able to have success against them. Illinois also struggles with pop big men. The lack of size, high-level
playmaking, and versatility makes me lower on this team than most. If a team has a good gameplan
against Cockburn or a center that can guard him straight up, then Illinois is a lot less appealing. I don’t
see them beating six different teams with their style of play. I’d be surprised if they get out of the
second weekend without incredible matchup luck or some outlier shooting performances. I’d say they
are significantly more likely to not make the second weekend than they are to make it out of there.
5.20. Iowa
Depth Chart
Coach: Fran McCaffrey
PG: Jordan Bohannon | Guard | 6’1” B1: Kris Murray | Forward | 6’8”
SG: Tony Perkins | Guard | 6’4” B2: Joe Toussaint | Guard | 6’0”
SF: Patrick McCaffrey | Forward | 6’9” B3: Ahron Ulis | Guard | 6’3”
PF: Keegan Murray | Forward | 6’8” B4: Connor McCaffrey | Guard | 6’5”
C: Filip Rebraca | Big | 6’9” B5: Payton Sandfort | Wing | 6’7”
Player Stats

• Keegan Murray: Massive scorer in a variety of ways. Kills in transition. Can post up or attack from the
perimeter. Good shooter. Good defender as well on and off the ball. Good rebounder. Not a very good
playmaker.
• Patrick McCaffrey: Skilled forward with size, capable of scoring at all three levels. Solid shooter. Can
handle the ball and a fluid athlete. Solid size but not good as a defender.
• Jordan Bohannon: Really good shooter. Shoots from range and off movement. Decent playmaker out
of pick and roll. Not a very good defender.
• Kris Murray: Plays backup 5 and spreads the floor. Good athlete, solid shooter and will take centers off
the dribble. Good defender as well. Opens up a ton for them when he is the center.
• Tony Perkins: Can push the pace and hit some spot up shots. Good defender on the perimeter.
Capable of attacking the rim, but generally doesn’t create offense very well.
• Joe Toussaint: Really good point of attack defender. Can handle the ball, attack the rim, and is a good
passer. Not much of a shooter or threat to score.
• Filip Rebraca: Smaller starting 5, can do some work in the post. Solid athlete for his position. Not much
of a shooter offensively.
• Payton Sandfort: Good sized wing that plays a role as a shooter. Good scorer within his role. Good but
not great shooter. Has size but is not very good defensively.
• Ahron Ulis: Can run some ball screens and will play defense. Gets out in transition well. Not a threat to
really score or shoot.
• Connor McCaffrey: Not much of a threat to score at all. Will shoot the occasional spot up but reluctant
shooter. Solid defender on the perimeter.
Scheme
• Can switch 1-5 with their smaller lineups, Rebraca will show on screens
• Play 4 out 1 in but will go 5 out with backup groups. A lot of motion-based offense.
• Can mix in 2-3 zone
• Deny from one pass away and stunt on drives
• Really up-tempo style of play
Strengths
• They have one of the better scorers in the country in Murray. He causes matchup
issues for a lot of teams with the variety of ways he can score.
• Spacing is generally good, they generate a lot of shots at the rim with a spaced floor
and bigger players that can attack off the dribble. Some of the guards attack well too.
• They operate well out of the post with different players combined with spacing
• They push the ball a ton in transition and are great at finishing those opportunities
• They don’t turn the ball over at all
• They will send multiple bodies at the offensive glass, good finishing team on putbacks
• They have some depth, will roll through a lot of players off the bench to continue their
style of play
• They have some solid shooters at different positions
• They do a good job of collapsing on drives and contesting shots at the rim
• Point of attack defense is good across a lot of their guard spots, guards are also strong
enough to switch up and hold their own
• Solid team at running spread pick and roll
Weaknesses
• Their point of attack defense can be attacked in different spots, a lot of shots are
allowed at the rim
• Their smaller lineups can lead to issues with interior defense
• Really poor at defending in pick and roll, either coverage can be exploited
• The don’t defend well in the post with their lack of size
• They play a decent number of non-shooters on the perimeter
• Ball handlers are not great at handling heavy ball pressure
• They really struggle on the defensive glass
• They are not as effective at attacking the rim against bigger teams
Evaluation
Iowa is a team that the metrics have really favored all season long. Their fast style of play has produced
a high-octane offense, while their defense has held up just well enough to keep their metrics favorable.
Iowa plays with smaller yet faster lineups to really attack some of the slower teams of their conference.
They get out in transition on every miss or turnover, going right to the rim and looking for quick
opportunities. They have the personnel to do this really well. In the half court, they also generate good
offense. They have one of the best scorers in the country, along with a generally spaced floor and guards
that can handle the ball. Kris Murray at the 5 gives them a really dangerous look. Defensively is where
this team struggles. The lack of size immediately puts them at a disadvantage. They do some switching
and hedging to keep actions on the perimeter, but they have enough defenders that can be attacked
that it doesn’t quite work. They actually do a solid job of protecting the rim, but opponents get there far
too often. Iowa has a defense that isn’t bad and can do some different stuff, but the defense isn’t good.
They will get hurt by teams with players that can self-generate paint touches or have a post threat. They
also don’t defend well at all in the pick and roll. I think their offense isn’t quite as good against bigger
teams with plus rim protection either. Iowa is interesting and can definitely go on a run, but I am not
quite as high on this team as the metrics suggest. I question if they can just really go at Big 10 teams
with their style and if their recent success can hold up against much more versatile teams.
5.21. Texas
Depth Chart
Coach: Chris Beard
PG: Marcus Carr | Guard | 6’2” B1: Devin Askew | Guard | 6’3”
SG: Courtney Ramey | Guard | 6’3” B2: Jase Febres | Guard | 6’5”
SF: Andrew Jones | Guard | 6’4” B3: Brock Cunningham | Forward | 6’5”
PF: Timmy Allen | Forward | 6’6” B4: Dylan Disu | Big | 6’9”
C: Christian Bishop | Big | 6’7” B5: Avery Benson | Guard | 6’4”
Player Stats

• Marcus Carr: Lead guard who runs a lot of pick and rolls and is a threat to shoot it off the dribble.
Decent playmaker but scoring efficiency hasn’t been there. Shot isn’t falling. Been good defensively.
• Timmy Allen: Skilled forward that plays at his own pace. Best when cutting off other players, decent in
the post. Solid defensively with size but lacks any kind of athleticism.
• Courtney Ramey: Solid pick and roll option and plus shooter. Has been really good defensively at the
point of attack. Plays bigger than his size. Not a great playmaker.
• Andrew Jones: Best used as a shooter, can also make some plays on the ball. Has good length and is a
decent athlete, uses that to attack closeouts and is solid defensively.
• Christian Bishop: Undersized center, but a really good athlete. Really good in pick and roll as a play
finisher. Can move well defensively, decent rim protector. Not skilled and really undersized.
• Dylan Disu: Big man off the bench with really good movement skills and solid skill-level for his
position. Good defensively but hasn’t figured out the offensive part at this level yet.
• Jase Febres: Primarily used as a shooter that comes off the bench. Isn’t a threat to score inside the arc.
Hasn’t shot the ball very well this season.
• Brock Cunningham: Solid role player who’s improved the shooting enough to hit some open looks.
Good defensively, high motor, solid rebounder. Doesn’t have a high skill-level, is an average athlete.
• Devin Askew: More of a connector than a lead guard, isn’t asked to do much offensively. Can make
some plays defensively on the perimeter.
Scheme
• Versatile ball screen coverages. Can switch 1-5 at times, can play at the level, or
can blitz
• Mostly 4 out motion offense designed to space the floor and create driving angles,
generally initiated with off ball screens
Strengths
• Highly skilled team with multiple offensive players that can operate at end of clock
situations. Carr, Ramey, and Jones can create at three levels, and Allen can create more
on the interior.
• Excellent execution within their scheme. Smaller lineups allow them to be quicker and
get to spots more. They get on the floor for loose balls and take a lot of charges. It’s very
difficult to get paint touches against them.
• Aggressive defensively at the point of attack, they force a lot of turnovers
• They can really fly around in rotations, good in scramble situations. They are good at
preventing threes despite the emphasis on preventing paint touches.
• Versatile pick and roll coverage with excellent execution. Bishop is athletic enough to
do different things out on the floor with good guards fighting over.
• A lot of their players can really hit tough shots
• They have a good amount of quality shooters on the roster
• They make it really difficult to execute your normal offense against them
Weaknesses
• They are very small and not too athletic or long to make up for it
• They can struggle to generate easy looks on offense at times, players can tend to
settle in the midrange
• They should be far better at manufacturing offense at pick and roll
• Very poor at defending in the post, Bishop lacks too much size there
• I don’t think their bench is very good, there’s a noticeable drop off with reserves
• When they switch against bigger teams it’s very easy to get favorable matchups inside
• They commit a ton of fouls with their aggression
• Lack of rebounding on the defensive glass because of their lack of size
• Their players have a track record of being good shooters, but shots haven’t fallen
Evaluation
I was really high on this Texas team before the season because of their talent level on the offensive side
of the ball. Surprisingly, this team has been good this year because of their defense. Chris Beard has
changed the culture of the program. Texas flies around the court playing the Chris Beard style of no
middle defense. They take charges, dive for loose balls, and they have far surpassed my expectations for
them as a result. They have a lack of size, but that means they are quick. They use this to their
advantage to play aggressively at the point of attack, rotate quicker, and they are very good in scramble
situations. It also allows them to play in a variety of different coverages. Offensively, they still have that
skill-level. They have four players that can really hit tough shots. They space the floor well. Texas just
does not necessarily have complementary strengths on the offensive side of the ball. None of the guards
are necessarily high-level playmakers, which also makes Bishop less effective. They don’t generate a ton
of paint touches despite the spacing. A lot of their players can shoot, but shots have not been falling as
well this year. Allen is a little bit of an awkward fit with this group despite his skill-level. Defensively, the
size can work against them. They aren’t great at protecting the rim and can struggle on switches and in
the post. Overall, I like the versatility and scheme execution of the defense and talent on the offense.
The offense hasn’t been put together and the size is a major issue for me in terms of scaling. This team is
second weekend good, but I’m not sure if they can scale much past that.
6.22. Saint Mary’s
Depth Chart
Coach: Randy Bennett
PG: Tommy Kuhse | Guard | 6’2” B1: Augustus Marciulionas | Guard | 6’4”
SG: Logan Johnson | Guard | 6’2” B2: Dan Fotu | Forward | 6’7”
SF: Alex Ducas | Guard | 6’6” B3: Jabe Mullins | Guard | 6’5”
PF: Kyle Bowen | Forward | 6’8” B4: Mitchell Saxen | Big | 6’10”
C: Matthias Tass | Big | 6’10” B5: Judah Brown | Forward | 6’6”
Player Stats

• Tommy Kuhse: Main offensive creator, excellent in pick and roll. Really good shooter off the dribble.
Can attack the rim and operate in tight spaces. Undersized guard but gets to his spots.
• Logan Johnson: One of the better athletes on the team, best perimeter defender. Can run some pick
and roll and attack the rim in transition. Limited shooter.
• Matthias Tass: Good post player, solid passer. Really fits well within their offensive system. Not a lot
of size and not a great athlete but positions himself very well defensively.
• Alex Ducas: Good shooter with range on his shot. Can handle the ball and attack some closeouts.
Good ball mover Not a great athlete. Decent perimeter defender with his size.
• Kyle Bowen: Spaces the floor and plays defense. Solid shooter but isn’t asked to do much else. Has
good size, fits well within the scheme, best forward sized defender on the team.
• Augustus Marciulionas: Has struggled offensively. Can run some pick and roll but has scored
inefficiently and has had a lot of turnovers. Solid defender on the perimeter.
• Dan Fotu: Solid play finisher and defender off the bench. Guards well on the perimeter for his size.
Capable of making catch and shoot jumpers.
• Jabe Mullins: Primarily comes off the bench to move the ball and shoot jumpers. Good in his role. Not
a very good athlete.
• Mitchell Saxen: Good energy big off the bench. Has good size and can protect the rim and grab
rebounds. Has a couple of moves in the post as well.
Scheme
• Very slow pace
• Hard hedge ball screens
• They don’t bring a ton of help from one pass away to defend the 3
• Heavy emphasis on guarding the 3-point line, no 3s or easy layups
Strengths
• Plus shooting at four positions on the floor around a center that can post and pass.
Players really understand how to space the floor, they get a ton of open looks.
• They have plus passing at all positions. Helps them run a lot of their advanced actions
and reads. Almost no isolation, everything is off an action.
• Really good at staying vertical and contesting shots. Do a great job of protecting the
rim as a team but also don’t foul.
• Players are completely bought into the scheme. Play at a slow pace, look for good
shots. The style can lead to some upsets.
• One of the smarter teams in the country. Do a fantastic job of scheme execution on
both ends of the floor without overwhelmingly talented personnel.
• Fantastic defensive rebounding team
• Force opposing teams into a lot of isolation
• Slow pace allows them to not play many players off the bench
• Offense gets a ton of paint touches
• Johnson and Kuhse are good pick and roll ball handlers
• They don’t allow any open 3s for opponents
• They will not allow anything in transition for opponents
Weaknesses
• Not a super athletic group, can struggle against bigger and more athletic teams
• Not very good at defending pick and rolls, can be hurt by really good passing
• Can be attacked in the post by really good post players
• They post up too much for how good they are with that action
• You can go under screens against most of their pick and roll ball handlers
• Not a lot of self-generation on offense. Rarely get to the line.
• Finishing around the rim can be an issue for a lot of their guards
• They can attack closeouts, but how effective are they when they are ran off the line?
• Some of their perimeter players can be attacked off the dribble
Evaluation
Saint Mary’s is one of the most interesting evaluations in college basketball. Their coach, Randy Bannett,
is absolutely one of the best in the nation. Saint Mary’s has a scheme on both ends of the floor that the
players are completely bought in to. They aren’t the most talented, but everyone fits within what they
do. Saint Mary’s plays really slow, grinds down the shot clock with ball movement, off-ball motion, and
ball screens. They work to find a good interior look or open 3. Defensively, their basic rules are no 3s and
no easy layups. They don’t provide a ton of help from one pass away and do a fantastic job of contesting
shots without fouling. Then they go grab every single defensive rebound. The basic defensive philosophy
has turned them into one of the best defenses in college basketball without having a ton of talent on
that end. The slow pace and defensive ability is a recipe for a potential upset in the second or third
round. I also think this team could be susceptible to an early upset. They are not very athletic and don’t
have a particularly large team. They have done a great job of protecting the rim, but their primary rim
protectors are not very large or athletic. I worry about how they play against bigger, more athletic teams
that can really attack the rim and contain ball screen actions. They also have some players that can be
attacked from the perimeter, and without bringing much help it could disproportionately hurt them. I
still really like this team’s upset potential, but I’m not sold on the upside.
6.23. Boise State
Depth Chart
Coach: Leon Rice
PG: Marcus Shaver | Guard | 6’2” B1: Max Rice | Guard | 6’5”
SG: Emmanuel Akot | Wing | 6’8” B2: Naje Smith | Forward | 6’7”
SF: Tyson Degenhart | Forward | 6’7” B3: Pavle Kuzmanovic | Guard | 6’5”
PF: Abu Kigab | Forward | 6’7” B4: Lukas Milner | Big | 6’10”
C: Mladen Armus | Big | 6’10” B5: Kasean Pryor | Wing | 6’9”
Player Stats

• Marcus Shaver: Most talented shot maker on the team, can really shoot it from deep off the dribble.
Can carry the offense at times late in games. Makes some bad decisions, poor playmaker. Undersized
combo, solid point of attack defender.
• Emmanuel Akot: Big wing that plays like a guard, asked to bring the ball up and initiate offense.
Handle and passing is good for his size. Good shooter. Really good wing defender. Very versatile overall
player.
• Abu Kigab: Strong forward with defensive versatility. Guards the other teams best player at times, has
great defensive versatility. Inconsistent shooter. Gets a lot of his offense in transition, but is skilled on
that end.
• Tyson Degenhart: Wing with size who can really shoot the ball. Mostly used to just space the floor but
can attack off the dribble as well. Can defend wings well with his size.
• Mladen Armus: Role player as a big, asked to set screens and defend shots at the rim. Not very useful
offensively. Not a great athlete.
• Max Rice: Takes a lot of shots with inconsistent results. Does have really deep range and is a threat.
Not a playmaker or ball handler. Is solid enough defensively within the scheme.
• Naje Smith: Strong forward who is capable of guarding multiple positions and sliding down to play the
5. Capable shooter. High motor role player.
• Pavle Kuzmanovic: Bigger guard that can run some pick and roll and hit shots from the perimeter.
Limited role on the team.
Scheme
• No-middle defensive scheme
• Drop coverage on ball screens
• A lot of 4-out motion offense
Strengths
• One of the bigger teams in the country, they run big across four positions
• Start three players that are versatile defenders who can really guard wings, can also
guard up or down the positional spectrum
• It’s hard to pick on anyone with this group defensively, the do a really good job of
keeping the ball in front and forcing long possessions
• They will force a lot of isolation play, make life difficult by denying one pass away
• It’s difficult to get 3s off against them with their length and their defensive scheme
• They do a good job of preventing ball handler from getting into the paint, forcing
tougher midrange jumpers
• Solid shooting team as a whole, most of their players are at least threats to shoot it
• They grab a ton of defensive rebounds
• They don’t foul very much, preventing easy shots from the line
• They defend the pick and roll well within the drop coverage, guards and wings do good
getting over screens
• They do a really good job of defending in the post
Weaknesses
• Very limited playmaking with this team, no real plus playmakers. Shaver takes on a lot
of offensive responsibility but isn’t much of a passer, Akot takes the ball up the court
but isn’t a traditional lead guard.
• Limited shot creation that’s positive. Akot, Shaver, and Kigab are all capable of getting
their own looks, but the efficiency isn’t always there.
• Generating paint touches can be difficult for them with their offensive personnel, they
have bigger players that don’t necessarily have a great first step from the perimeter
• They don’t have very much depth to go to
• Really poor free throw shooting team
• Too many post ups for how effective this team is at them
Evaluation
Boise State has been one of the more pleasant surprises of the season. They have become one of the
better mid-major teams in the country through really good defensive play. Akot and Kigab are very good
defenders on the wing and combined with their scheme can handle a lot of good offenses. They have
size and length across multiple positional groups, and their drop coverage is tough to deal with without
a really dynamic lead ball handler. I think their defense will be able to translate up against high-major
teams because of their general size. They run with bigger groups and play a lot of lineup combinations
with three wings next to a guard and a big. They are also versatile and can go to smaller groups with
three wing-sized players in the frontcourt that can execute more switching. What will hold this team
back is the offensive side of the ball. While they do have players who can effectively get their own, they
lack a lead primary to tie everyone together. Shaver, Akot, and Kigab are all very good individual
offensive players, but none of them is a real threat to create for others. Leon Rice is an excellent coach
and they run good offensive concepts, but the personnel just isn’t there to execute. If you can stifle the
offense and score against this team before the defense is set, your life will be a lot easier. Teams that
have really dynamic lead guards may be able to generate more offense than the average team against
Boise State. They are capable of playing up against good competition, and if shots are really falling for
Shaver, Akot, or Degenhart than anything can happen. However, I would say a second weekend run for
this team is not as likely as they would hope.
6.24. San Diego State
Depth Chart
Coach: Brian Dutcher
PG: Lamont Butler | Guard | 6’0” B1: Adam Seiko | Guard | 6’3”
SG: Trey Pulliam | Guard | 6’3” B2: Aguek Arop | Wing | 6’6”
SF: Matt Bradley | Guard | 6’4” B3: Chad Baker-Mazara | Forward | 6’7”
PF: Keshad Johnson | Forward | 6’7” B4: Joshua Tomiac | Forward | 6’9”
C: Nathan Mensah | Big | 6’10” B5: Tahirou Diabate | Big | 6’9”
Player Stats

• Matt Bradley: Really high-level shot maker. One of the better scorers in the country. Shoots a high
percentage from deep on difficult attempts off the dribble. Can get to the rim and draw fouls. Strong
frame and solid athlete, above average defender.
• Nathan Mensah: Anchor of the defense, really good rim protector. Mobile for a center. Not a very
good offensive player. Poor in the post, not a great finisher overall. Lacks touch.
• Trey Pulliam: Solid ball handler and shot creator. Probably the best playmaker on the team. Average
shooter. Good defender with his length.
• Lamont Butler: Really good point of attack defender. Arguably the best one on the team. Overtasked
offensively with his ball handling responsibilities.
• Keshad Johnson: Play finishing forward. Not much of a shooter or ball handler. Good athlete. Versatile
defender that makes plays on that end.
• Adam Seiko: Really good shooter. Can do some shooting off movement. Doesn’t do much else
offensively. Strong frame, good defender on the perimeter.
• Aguek Arop: Really good wing defender. Not much of an offensive threat, doesn’t really look to score.
Strong frame and good athlete, can also provide secondary rim protection. Great scheme fit.
• Chad Baker-Mazara: Really good wing defender who can block some shots as well. Good shooter who
is also good in transition. Limited ball handler.
• Joshua Tomiac: Plays backup center, can give them a different looks as someone that can make shots
from beyond the arc. Good defender with some versatility.
• Tahirou Diabate: Will play some backup 5 off the bench. Fits well in their system, high motor and can
switch out on the perimeter.
Scheme
• Very strong pack line, switch a lot of actions
• Use of wheel to create easy looks or spread the floor into their next actions
• Drop coverage with Mensah, will also do some switching
Strengths
• They do an excellent job within their scheme. Gap presence is great, and players really
work hard to stunt and recover on drives.
• Elite pick and roll defense. Guards are really active getting through screens, Mensah in
drop is really tough to score against. Big men are also great at switching.
• Excellent at defending in the post. Can opt to double and make really good rotations.
Mensah is a great individual post defender.
• No weak points at the point of attack defensively. They force really long opponent
possessions because they struggle to generate looks against them.
• Mensah is really good at defending the rim, and other players are helpful. They do a
great job in rotation to prevent easy looks at the rim in the first place.
• Very active defensively. They force a lot of turnovers with well-timed stunts.
• They have one of the best shot creators and tough shot makers in the country in
Bradley, which helps their late clock and late game offense
• Not a high-volume shooting team but they have some good shooters
• Really good closeout team. They don’t get beat too often off the dribble and contest.
Weaknesses
• They have a massive playmaking deficit who not creators for others
• Self-generated paint touches are a major issue for this team. Their best players score
more at two levels, from 3 and midrange.
• In general, they play a lot of non-shooters to have defensively slanted lineups
• They lack a true primary, which causes offensive inconsistency and turnovers
• They don’t run lineups that are necessarily that tall
• They will give up a lot of opponent looks from 3 with their scheme
• Really poor in pick and roll offense. Their guards struggle to hit the roll man, they
aren’t good at finishing around the rim, and the perimeter spacing is lacking.
• They post up a decent amount despite that not generated good results.
Evaluation
San Diego State is a very difficult evaluation. They are an elite defensive team with arguably the worst
offense of any at-large team in the tournament. Brian Dutcher has done an excellent job of building a
defensive-minded culture and recruiting players that can execute his system. San Diego State usually
leans towards defense, but this year is pushing the limits of that. Defensively, SDSU is excellent at all 5
spots. They also have defensive talent off the bench. The perimeter players aren’t very big, but they are
really strong and make quick rotations. Dutcher has done an excellent coaching job, as it always feels
like the processing speed is high defensively, with players moving and communicating as one. It helps to
have Mensah as the anchor of the defense, who’s one of the best rim protectors in the country, and he
fits their switching. SDSU can also go to some smaller lineups to switch even more seamlessly. This is an
elite defense. Offensively, they are just not good. They don’t have a natural lead ball handler. They often
defer to Bradley taking tough shots. They just don’t have the offensive personnel to consistently
generate good looks. They have enough good players that they can have nights where their offense
looks good, but those are the exception to the rule. There is nothing consistent for this offense to fall
back on, making this team really tough to project in the tournament. Defensively, I think teams that can
really shoot it could give them worries. Offensively, any team that has an elite defender to guard Bradley
could completely shut them down. Matchups and opponent shooting are going to be key for SDSU but
making it to the second weekend is questionable given their offensive ability.
6.25. Wisconsin
Depth Chart
Coach: Greg Gard
PG: Chucky Hepburn | Guard | 6’2” B1: Chris Vogt | Big | 7’1”
SG: Brad Davison | Guard | 6’4” B2: Lorne Bowman | Guard | 6’2”
SF: Johnny Davis | Wing | 6’5” B3: Ben Carlson | Forward | 6’9”
PF: Tyler Wahl | Forward | 6’9” B4: Carter Gilmore | Forward | 6’7”
C: Steven Crowl | Big | 7’0” B5: Jahcobi Neath | Guard | 6’3”
Player Stats

• Johnny Davis: Ridiculously high-level two-way player. Arguably the best player in the country. Best
guard in college basketball. Shot creator, crazy off-ball defender, lockdown on-ball defender. Has lifted
this team on his shoulders.
• Brad Davison: Shooter that does a lot of work off movement and ball screens. Not very good inside
the arc and not much of a playmaker. Good perimeter defender.
• Chucky Hepburn: Handles the ball in pick and roll more as a scoring option. Good shooter that can do
it off the dribble. Good point of attack defender. Limited playmaker.
• Tyler Wahl: Best forward-sized defender on the team. Good help instincts and can slide feet on the
perimeter. Not a shooter at all, but solid scorer in the post.
• Steven Crowl: Stretch big, solid catch and shoot threat. Not great defensively, is skinny for his size and
gets pushed around a bit. Doesn’t move his feet very well.
• Chris Vogt: Traditional center off the bench. Good size and strength to defend in the post and grab
rebounds. Not much of an athlete, limited skill on the interior.
• Lorne Bowman: Can do some secondary work in pick and roll and can spot up as a shooting threat.
Not a great offensive player, but plus defender on the perimeter.
• Ben Carlson: Not an offensive threat at all. Comes in to play defense in a similar secondary helper role
to Wahl.
• Jahcobi Neath: Small offensive role in limited minutes off the bench. Can provide some energy at
times. Decent defender on the perimeter.
Scheme
• Run a 4-out motion offense, will defer to sets for Davis later in games
• Help heavily in the gaps, pack line defense
• Will mostly play drop coverage with centers
Strengths
• They have one of the best players in the country who can carry them to wins with his
on-ball creation. His shot diet makes it difficult to contain him, scores at all three levels.
• Playing with a stretch 5 can create some matchup issues
• Pick and roll defense is really strong. Length in the drop combined with guards doing a
good job of fighting over screens and getting back.
• They do a good job of helping in gaps while also getting out and contesting shots from
the perimeter
• Good point of attack defense throughout their rotation
• Guards are all smart players, they rarely turn the ball over
• They finish well at the rim when they get there. Big men finish well, and guards in
Davis and Hepburn also are good finishers.
• Guards are really good at scoring out of ball screens, they are dynamic in using them
Weaknesses
• There is a major lack of playmaking on this team, Davis is the best at creating for
others but isn’t great at it
• Shooting is a major issue. They have players who are capable but not above average
shooters. Their best shooters don’t shoot very good percentages. There are multiple
non-shooters in their rotation that are not be guarded, such as Wahl.
• Really bad at defending in the post, Crowl is often completely overmatched
• Post touches are a large part of their offense, but they don’t generate good results
• They don’t get a lot of self-created looks at the rim
• Defensive scheme does not allow them to force many turnovers
• They do not have very much quality depth
Evaluation
Johnny Davis deserves all the credit in the world for where this Wisconsin team is at. Many of their
bigger wins have come from Wisconsin getting out of their motion offense to force feed him the ball,
followed by his ridiculous skillset carrying them to wins. This might not even be an NIT team without
Davis, he’s that good and important. Hepburn and Davison are capable offensive players and do take
some of the offensive pressure off of Davis. Davison is a perimeter shooting threat, and he does occupy
gravity with his movement shooting. Hepburn can do a little more on the ball, and I also really like his
point of attack defense. Outside of that, the skillset of Crowl as a capable catch and shoot option is also
helpful for spacing the floor for Davis, but Wahl does take away from that some because teams put their
centers on him and camp in the paint. Defensively, Wisconsin has good point of attack defenders and
does a good job at playing in the gaps. The guards also do a good job of knowing when to help and
getting back to closeout. They are good with their stunts at shooters from one pass away. I still have
major concerns with this team on both ends. Their best shooters aren’t actually shooting the ball that
well this season. At a certain point, teams are going to really load up to Johnny Davis. Also, if Johnny
Davis has one game that he isn’t hitting tough shots, Wisconsin’s tournament hopes could be over. They
are very reliant on him to generate offense, but also don’t tend to really play through him until they
need to. Too much is run through the other players that just aren’t nearly as capable as he is offensively.
That’s how the offense is designed. Defensively, they are horrendous at defending in the post. I also
don’t like their rim protection, and they can give up some good shots from deep. Johnny Davis might
just be so good that he carries this team to the second weekend. I’d be surprised if they get further than
that. The overall talent level on this team is not very high, and they have a significant number of
weaknesses on both ends.
6.26. Memphis
Depth Chart
Coach: Penny Hardaway
PG: Alex Lomax | Guard | 6’0” B1: Earl Timberlake | Wing | 6’6”
SG: Lester Quinones | Guard | 6’5” B2: Tyler Harris | Guard | 5’9”
SF: Landers Nolley | Wing | 6’7” B3: Josh Minott | Forward | 6’8”
PF: DeAndre Williams | Forward | 6’9” B4: Malcolm Dandridge | Big | 6’9”
C: Jalen Duren | Big | 6’11” B5: Jayden Hardaway | Forward | 6’5”
Player Stats

• DeAndre Williams: Big, athletic forward who is skilled enough to create his own at the rim and in the
midrange. Really good defensive player. Can post smaller players. Good handle for his size.
• Jalen Duren: Really good rim protector. Crazy length and strength combination. Great timing from the
weakside. Limited offensively to finishing plays but does that well. Very good rebounder. Can move his
feet on the perimeter some defensively.
• Landers Nolley: 3 and D wing. Doesn’t get to the rim much or create shots but is a really good shooter.
Has good size and is a plus athlete, makes him a good wing defender.
• Lester Quinones: Good shooter, capable of doing some stuff off the dribble as well. Not a great
decision-maker at times. Good defensive player, plus athlete and has some size.
• Alex Lomax: Undersized starting guard, good ball handler and can make some passing reads. Initiates a
lot of offense, not much of a scoring role. Good point of attack defense, quick player on the perimeter.
• Earl Timberlake: Athletic wing, really helps defensively off the bench. Can handle the ball some. Not a
shooter but good at attacking the rim.
• Tyler Harris: Really small guard, quick and a good ball handler. Very good shooter. Helps their offense.
Very small, not too good defensively.
• Josh Minott: Really athletic and fluid forward. A little bit raw in terms of feel but has some skill.
Flashes of handling and massive finishes, can fly around on defense at times and make plays.
• Malcolm Dandridge: Backup 5, can block some shots and finish at the rim. Not a bad athlete. Good
rebounder.
Scheme
• Extended pressure, go to a man press with traps
• They play at a very fast pace
• Drop coverage with Duren
• Deny better players from one pass away, stunt from one pass away on drives, trust
the center to bring help, rotate over from the weakside, will do some switching. They
will more aggressively help off of non-threats.
Strengths
• They are a very athletic team and bring athleticism off the bench as well. They are
functional as well, using the athletes within their scheme.
• They kill guards that aren’t very good, force a lot of turnovers
• Duren’s ability to protect the rim allows them to get away with a much more
aggressive style of defense. They also have really good secondary rim protectors.
• Duren is excellent defending in pick and roll and the guards help out well
• Very good in transition. Athletes shine there, but shooters also do well.
• They go after the offensive glass and their big men get a lot of offensive rebounds
• They will attack the rim very aggressively, they get to the line a lot as a result
• They have some talented shooters in Nolley, Quinones, and Harris
• They are a good cutting team with their frontcourt players
• They can bother opposing shooters with their length, good closeout team
Weaknesses
• Guard play has been an issue for this team all season long. Harris and Lomax have
been getting more comfortable all season, but they are far from elite.
• They can play really out of control at times. Ridiculously high turnover team.
• They play a lot of non-shooters in their rotation; they only have 3 plus shooters
• Their aggressive style can lead to really good open looks from 3 at times
• Pick and rolls have not been successful. Guards aren’t really threats to score out of
them and don’t always make the right reads, spacing can be off with personnel
• Very high foul team because of their style
• They don’t take advantage of their size in the post, Duren is not good there
• Overall offense can really get stagnant with a lot of poor shots at times
Evaluation
Memphis is a very difficult evaluation because they have had such a rollercoaster season. They had
massive expectations after enrolling two of the top 7 recruits (who were 17 years old, by the way) and
returning a lot of players from last season. They have picked up their play significantly over the back half
of the season. They play a distinct style that matches their athletic personnel. They will press the entire
game, trap, force turnovers, and play really fast. They have some really good point of attack defenders
and long athletes on the wing to execute this. With Duren in the middle, they can afford more
breakdowns than most teams. If you don’t have really good guard play, this will be a challenging
matchup. Offensively there are major worries. It is difficult for Memphis to consistently generate good
looks with their lack of shooting and high-level on-ball players. The point guards are fine, but don’t drive
efficient offense. Williams is good but doesn’t create for others. They have some shooters, and their
frontcourt players can bulldoze to the rim. However, against teams that can match their size and
athleticism, the half-court offense is poor. They are much better in early offense or transition. Thinking
of how they can scale to a tournament setting is difficult. They torment teams without strong guard
play, and the overall landscape of college guards is weaker this year. However, against more athletic
teams their offense will really struggle. Also, I don’t think their defense will hold up against opponents
that shoot well and have really good guards. This is a major matchup team. If they get the right
matchups, I can see them in the second weekend.
6.27. Murray State
Depth Chart
Coach: Matt McMahon
PG: Justice Hill | Guard | 6’0” B1: Trae Hannibal | Guard | 6’2”
SG: Carter Collins | Guard | 6’3” B2: Jordan Skipper-Brown | Forward | 6’6”
SF: Tevin Brown | Guard | 6’5” B3: DaQuan Smith | Guard | 6’1”
PF: DJ Burns | Forward | 6’7” B4: Nicholas McMullen | Forward | 6’8”
C: KJ Williams | Forward | 6’10” B5: Dionte Bostick | Guard | 6’2”
Player Stats

• Tevin Brown: Super underrated player, one of the best shooters in the country. Big time shooter off of
movement. Can also attack closeouts. Not great with self-creation, but capable of attacking closeouts.
• K.J. Williams: Big, physical forward who plays the 5. Capable shooter, though inconsistent. Good
athlete, can move his feet defensively. Very good rebounder. Can struggle with a lot of size.
• Justice Hill: Heavy usage in ball screens, also a good shooter in spot ups. Quick and has a good handle.
Undersized and can be attacked at the point of attack defensively.
• Trae Hannibal: Downhill threat to score, especially in transition. Not a good shooter, but more capable
of a ball handler. Can also defend well at the point of attack, active in gaps.
• DJ Burns: Role player who plays defense and gets rebounds. All over the place defensively with blocks
and steals. Really good offensive rebounder. Can’t shoot, doesn’t do anything on the ball.
• Carter Collins: Very low usage offensive player, capable of knocking down spot up looks. Plus
defensive player, can guard some bigger assignments with his length.
• Jordan Skipper-Brown: Athletic wing who comes in to play defense. Great secondary rim protector,
guards well on the wing. Low usage offensive player, but knows his role.
• DaQuan Smith: Smaller guard, shoots a lot of 3s but a streaky shooter. Not a playmaker. Plays hard at
the point of attack defensively.
• Nicholas McMullen: Plays backup center as an undersized 5. Good athlete, can provide some rim
protection and some defensive versatility.
Scheme
• Show or play at the level of ball screens
• Very transition heavy team
• Mostly a set-based offense, but will also run motion heavy read and react actions
• Pack line defense, will play heavily in the gaps against drives, really aggressively help
from the weakside corner, aggressive on the ball
Strengths
• They utilize space and cuts to create a lot of rim pressure. Their guards are capable of
getting downhill attacking closeouts and off screens, and big men are good cutters.
• One of the highest usage transition teams and one of the best. They do a great job of
getting wide and deep, spreading the floor with shooters and attacking the rim.
• They really attack the offensive glass with Williams and Burns, one of the better
offensive rebounding teams in the country
• Do a great job of using Tevin Brown. They weaponize his movement shooting in a way
that opens up the floor for other players. The sets they run for him are exceptional.
• Versatility on defense with their big men, both starters are athletic with good
movement skills on the perimeter
• They are really good at getting back and defending in transition
• Prevent a good number of shots at the rim, will help in the gaps
• Guards are really strong point of attack defenders, very aggressive and active
• Big men use activity to generate turnovers, they are versatile and athletic
Weaknesses
• Size is an issue for this team. They play relatively small at multiple positions and have
struggled against bigger teams.
• Not very good at protecting the rim. They prevent shots from there, but the size of
their rim protectors is not ideal.
• Not a great team at finishing around the rim, a lot of undersized players
• They give up a lot of 3s to attempt to prevent teams from getting to the basket
• I wish they were better at shooting for how they play offensively
• Can be over-reliant on transition
• They don’t have a ton of depth and rarely leave players in when in foul trouble
Evaluation
Murray State has come out of nowhere to turn themselves into a team worthy of a tournament bid.
They have three really good college basketball players in Brown, Williams, and Hill. This can be a fun
team to watch with how they play, and Matt McMahon should get a lot more buzz for the job he’s done.
Murray State does a great job of utilizing screening and movement offensively to create openings for
other players. Brown’s shooting gravity is used as a weapon to allow players such as Hill and Hannibal
too attack the paint. Williams can space the floor as well but is skilled enough to use his size to his
advantage. They run a lot of read and react motion but also have exceptional sets. They are a menacing
in transition, really pushing the pace and generating easy looks from 3 or at the rim. The defense has
been really good for Murray State this season. They are versatile and have good athletes. Burns and
Williams are the forwards that can play out on the perimeter. They are good at the point of attack
defensively and execute well within their scheme. I do have some worries about how they scale against
the very best teams. They are undersized at many positions. Defensively, size is my biggest concern with
them. I’m not sure they can protect the rim well enough or defend the best post players, but they might
be good enough at the point of attack to mitigate that. Offensively, they might play too many non-
shooters for their own style to work against every team, despite the guards doing a great job with
creation. Murray State can reach the second weekend with some shooting or matchup luck, they are
very good. I’m not too sure they can go far beyond that.
6.28. San Francisco
Depth Chart
Coach: Todd Golden
PG: Khalil Shabazz | Guard | 6’1” B1: Josh Kunen | Forward | 6’8”
SG: Jamaree Bouyea | Guard | 6’2” B2: Julian Rishwain | Guard | 6’5”
SF: Gabe Stefanini | Guard | 6’3” B3: Zane Meeks | Forward | 6’9”
PF: Patrick Tape | Forward | 6’9” B4: Dzmitry Ryuny | Forward | 6’9”
C: Yauhen Massalski | Forward | 6’10” B5: Volodymyr Markovetskyy | Center | 7’1”
Player Stats

• Jamaree Bouyea: One of the best guards in the country. Really good athlete, shooter off the dribble,
solid playmaker. Crafty ball handler that can get to the rim and make plays. Three-level scorer. Also
really good defensively.
• Khalil Shabazz: Another shot creating guard, not super-efficient. Really good shooter from 3 on a
tough shot diet. Can make some really tough shots. Not a playmaker. Really strong point of attack
defender.
• Yauhen Massalski: Solid offensive option in the post and can make plays from the elbow or top of the
key. Good finisher. Does a good job of protecting the rim without fouling. A little undersized. Not a bad
athlete.
• Gabe Stefanini: Shooter that spaces the floor during ball screen actions. Also a threat to pull up after
using a screen. Solid defensively, but a little undersized positionally and not a great athlete.
• Patrick Tape: Good defensive forward. Plus athlete that can move his feet on the perimeter. Reluctant
shooter. Minimal offensive role outside of play finishing.
• Josh Kunen: Floor spacing forward that isn’t a great shooter. Long load into the inconsistent shot.
Good defensively as a big forward on the perimeter.
• Julian Rishwain: Really good shooter off the bench. Weapon off of screens or hand offs. Has solid size
for his role.
• Zane Meeks: Big forward that comes off the bench to shoot it. Inconsistent shot but enough of a
threat to get guarded beyond the line. Not great defensively.
Scheme
• Elements of Princeton offense
• Massalski can play drop, otherwise they are at the level and can ice side ball screens
• No middle, deny from one pass away, defend the 3
Strengths
• Really strong backcourt. Both Bouyea and Shabazz can create shots off the dribble,
shoot it with real range, and Bouyea can make plays for others.
• Point of attack defense is really strong. The two guards do a great job, with Bouyea
taking on a lot of the more difficult assignments and thriving.
• They run good actions to utilize their different guards and shooter strengths
• One of the more analytically inclined teams in the country in terms of what to take
away and where to get shots from
• They completely shut off the 3-point line. Defense is very focused on taking away
those shots, they don’t bring a ton of help and trust their perimeter matchups.
• They do a good job of protecting the paint without fouling, players are taught really
well with verticality. Massalski does well in the drop scheme.
• They shoot a good number of threes with multiple threats, especially off the bench. Fit
well within placing pieces to spread the floor for the primary weapons.
• Very effective in transition on both ends
• Good defensive rebounding team
• They do a good job of stalling out opponent possessions with ball pressure and denials
• They do well at defending in the post, excel at bringing help and making rotations
Weaknesses
• They are very reliant on the guards to generate a lot of their offense. They can default
to too much self-creation at times out of necessity.
• They take a lot of 3s, but I wish they had more shooters who were capable
• They don’t have a ton of size across the board, not really any wing-sized players that
play and big men aren’t that big. Can struggle with bigger teams.
• They don’t get to the line a very good amount
• They allow a lot of shots at the rim, which is a result of their scheme but is dangerous
• Not very athletic in the frontcourt, which can get them hurt in certain matchups
• Post ups are too large of a part of their offense for their effectiveness
Evaluation
San Francisco has been a great story out of the previously lackluster WCC. They have one of the better
backcourts in the nation that rarely gets talked about in Jamaree Bouyea and Khalil Shabazz. What
pushes this backcourt into the upper echelon of backcourts in college basketball for me is that they are
really good on the defensive side of the ball. You can make the argument that each player is better on
that end. They do an excellent job at the point of attack against opposing backcourts. They fight over
screens really well, which allows USF to play more drop coverage. They execute the scheme well in
preventing and contesting deep looks. Massalski also helps make the defense, doing a really good job of
protecting the rim without having great athleticism or size. He does it with positioning and verticality.
USF also has good secondary rim protection. By disallowing 3s and contesting well at the rim, USF has
built a really good defense. Offensively, the guards do a great job of running the show. Each are pick and
roll weapons with the ability to shoot off the dribble. They are hard to contain on the perimeter.
Massalski is also good with a variety of actions and as a screener. I do worry about how this team scales
to play against bigger and more athletic competition. I’m also unsure of how well they can protect the
rim against teams that have great finishers, which would expose their defensive scheme. The other
ancillary pieces aren’t too good compared to other teams. I think USF might be able to win a game with
the right matchup, but I’d be surprised to see them in the second weekend without some luck.
7.29. Marquette
Depth Chart
Coach: Shaka Smart
PG: Tyler Kolek | Guard | 6’3” B1: Kameron Jones | Guard | 6’4”
SG: Darryl Morsell | Guard | 6’5” B2: Oso Ighodaro | Forward | 6’9”
SF: Justin Lewis | Forward | 6’7” B3: Greg Elliott | Guard | 6’3”
PF: Olivier-Maxence Prosper | Forward | 6’8” B4: Stevie Mitchell | Guard | 6’2”
C: Kur Kuath | Big | 6’10” B5: David Joplin | Forward | 6’7”
Player Stats

• Justin Lewis: Big forward that has found his rhythm as a shot creator, taking advantage of touch and
size. Really strong with a good frame for his role. Shooting is inconsistent. Good defender against
multiple types of players.
• Darryl Morsell: Elite defensive guard. Makes a lot of plays on that end and is also versatile. Has also
turned himself into a good offensive player, capable shooter and can run pick and roll. Can create his
own shot.
• Tyler Kolek: Elite ball handler in pick and roll. Makes some ridiculously high-level passes out of ball
screens, excellent with his deliveries and easily hits to opposite corners. Creative guard who can also
shoot off the dribble. Not a great athlete and poor defensively.
• Kur Kuath: Athletic rim protector and rim runner. Athleticism gives him some defensive versatility.
Good in his role, can’t ask him to do much else.
• Olivier-Maxence Prosper: Really good defensive player, a lot of length and size. Doesn’t shoot the ball
much, but good cutter and finisher. Strong role player.
• Kameron Jones: Good two-way player off the bench, can defend on the ball and run some pick and
roll. Good shooter in spot ups.
• Greg Elliot: 3 and D guard, good at the point of attack defensively. Good shooter and can attack some
closeouts.
• Oso Ighodaro: Athletic, back up big man. Can run different coverages, capable at the dunker or in pick
and roll.
Scheme
• Extremely pick and roll heavy offense with Morsell, Kolek, and Jones
• Very aggressive on the ball defensively, will play in passing lanes
• At the level of ball screens
• Mix in some full court and ¾ court press
• Push the ball in transition
Strengths
• Excellent in their pick and roll defense, the big men do a great job out on the floor and
the rotations are solid. Generally bigger players rotating to tag.
• They play with really big lineups at 4 positions, tons of length and plus athleticism
• They finish really well in the paint, using their size to their advantage
• Really good rim protection, they have a lot of players that are good at it
• They are tough to beat at the point of attack with a lot of high-level defensive players
• One of the higher usage pick and roll teams in the country, really good at hitting the
roll man or finding players on kickouts
• They have players that can really shot it in Jones and Elliott, they use them well
• Good passing team overall, often make extra passes
• Help is generally good, really good at using size and length
• Their players off the bench are generally good, not a huge drop off
Weaknesses
• Overall shot creation can be questionable. Some of their players are passers first, and
their self-creators don’t generate easy looks and can often be inefficient. The passing
can lead to nowhere at times.
• Their centers are more rangy than bulky, resulting in them not being very good at
defending in the post
• They run a ton of pick and roll, but since the players that run them either aren’t major
scoring threats or great playmakers it doesn’t lead to a ton of offense at times
• They are not very good in post ups, meaning they can’t capitalize on some of their
size. Sometimes they can have size that can’t shoot or can’t attack mismatches, which
congests the floor.
• They do not rebound the ball well at either end of the floor despite all of their length
and athleticism
• The lack of self-generation leads to a low free throw rate offensively
• Paint touches can be tough for them to generate at times
• They can be overaggressive at times on defense, leading to players getting to the rim
Evaluation
Marquette is another team that began the season with low expectations, but they have earned their
spot into the tournament with a really good season. The major selling points of this team is they have
size, they defend, and they run a ton of pick and rolls. The size allows them to play more aggressive at
the point of attack. They have some really good defensive players on the perimeter in Morsell and Lewis
that do great in this system. They also have really good rim protection with their centers, as well as a lot
of secondary rim protection. Offensively, they do a good job utilizing their personnel and running a ton
of ball screens with Kolek, Morsell, and Jones. Their offense is dynamic because all can use the screens
in different ways. This is a good team, but the ceiling is limited in my eyes. They can be too aggressive at
times, and there are some players that can be attacked on the perimeter. I am worried about the
offense. They move the ball around well and get into actions, but a lot of times it doesn’t go anywhere
because they lack a singular creator of offense and plus spacing. Lewis is probably the best shot creator,
but he doesn’t generate easy looks. I think they could struggle with teams that can match their size.
Matchups are very important for Marquette and making the second weekend is possible but not likely.
7.30. Loyola Chicago
Depth Chart
Coach: Drew Valentine
PG: Braden Norris | Guard | 6’0” B1: Marquise Kennedy | Guard | 6’1”
SG: Lucas Williamson | Guard | 6’4” B2: Ryan Schwieger | Guard | 6’6”
SF: Tate Hall | Forward | 6’6” B3: Tom Welch | Forward | 6’8”
PF: Aher Uguak | Forward | 6’7” B4: Jacob Hutson | Big | 6’10”
C: Chris Knight | Forward | 6’7” B5: Keith Clemons | Guard | 6’1”
Player Stats

• Lucas Williamson: Really good two-way player, one of the most underrated players in college
basketball. Great defender that can guard multiple spots. Really good shooter, can also handle the ball
and create shots. Solid playmaker.
• Braden Norris: Really good shooter, dangerous off the dribble. Very good in pick and roll, best passer
on the team. Not a great defensive player, lacks size and isn’t the best athlete.
• Aher Uguak: Great defensive player. Very versatile, can easily switch out on the perimeter. Limited
offensive player, has improved the jumper but isn’t too reliable. Can finish around the rim, but also can
make poor decisions when he puts the ball on the deck.
• Marquise Kennedy: Really good defensive-minded guard. Plays bigger than his size. Guards really well
at the point of attack. Quick and can get to the rim, but not much of a shooting threat. Capable ball
handler in pick and roll.
• Tate Hall: Really dangerous shooter with size. Mostly used in a spot up role. Solid defender at the
point of attack but isn’t the quickest laterally. Not asked to do much on the ball, but is a good mover
without it and is a good ball mover.
• Ryan Schwieger: Another shooter that handles the ball a little more than Hall. The release on his shot
is a little slower, more of a catch and shoot weapon but not as good on the move. Not a great defender.
• Chris Knight: Starts at the 5 but doesn’t play huge minutes. Probably the best rim protector on the
team, but also has some defensive versatility. Good athlete. Has a limited offensive role, not a shooter.
• Tom Welch: Has played his way into being a limited backup 5. Solid athlete and will shoot a little. Used
more to bring some energy off the bench.
Scheme
• No-middle scheme, will bring more aggressive help than their previous teams
• Will blitz better players but mostly will play at the level of ball screens
• They can go to smaller lineups that do more switching
• More of a set-based offense, but players can make reads out of them. Mostly 4 out but
can go to 5 out looks with smaller groups.
Strengths
• They have a very versatile defensive group. They have solid size down the positional
spectrum with a few elite defensive players in Williamson, Uguak, and Kennedy.
• High-level pick and roll team, and they run a ton of them. Multiple good ball handlers
with good spacing on the perimeter.
• Their offense always feels like they’re operating in space. Great with player placement
and there’s purpose to how and where they run their actions.
• They will really grind down opponent possessions with their defense, forcing them out
of their sets and making them play in isolations with their scheme
• Really good overall passing and cutting team. Every player fits within their system and
makes a lot of good reads.
• They prevent opponent 3s while also doing a good job of contesting shots at the rim
• Great defensive rebounding team with good rebounders at smaller positions
• They have committed to only shooting 3s and layups, everything is designed for that
• They have 4 really dangerous shooters in Norris, Hall, Schweiger, and Williamson
Weaknesses
• They are an overall undersized team. Their starting big men are 6’7”.
• They can turn the ball over at times against really heavy pressure
• Defensive scheme is designed to allow some shots at the rim to defend the 3, but at
times that can be an issue with good but not great rim protection
• Individual self-creation is a question I have for this team, I’m not sure who is really
putting pressure on the defense when not involved in a ball screen
• They are not a great team defending in ball screens. Tags can be from smaller players,
or you can involve weaker players in the initial action.
• They are not a very fast or athletic team, perimeter foot speed could be an issue
• Post defense could potentially be an issue against elite post players
• They don’t go for any offensive rebounds for the sake of their transition defense
Evaluation
Yet again, Loyola Chicago wins the Missouri Valley Conference and enters the tournament as a metrics
darling. This is a team basketball nerds loved because of their style of play and ridiculously good set
design under Porter Moser, but new head coach Drew Valentine does a lot of similar stuff. This team
plays an attractive brand of basketball on both ends. Defensively, they play more of a no-middle, using
their athletic big men to try and help outside of the paint. They do a great job of not overhelping and
preventing opponent 3s. They have defensive versatility with their personnel, able to do some switching
and they can run a lot of different ball screen coverages. They also have multiple elite defenders.
Offensively, they are great at creating space with their sets. They use every inch of the floor really well,
leveraging their elite shooters to manipulate help responsibilities and create openings. There are
reasons that this is not the most highly seeded team. They are missing some size on the interior, which
can trouble them against bigger teams. They are not the quickest on the perimeter defensively at all
spots. Offensively, they don’t have the best individual creators without a ball screen. They can struggle
with ball pressure at times. You can limit their offense with really strong point of attack defense. Overall,
the lack of elite talent and size limits their upside. However, this is a very good team that can win a
game or two in the tournament.
7.31. Seton Hall
Depth Chart
Coach: Kevin Willard
PG: Jared Rhoden | Guard | 6’6” B1: Jamir Harris | Guard | 6’2”
SG: Kadary Richmond | Guard | 6’5” B2: Tyrese Samuel | Forward | 6’10”
SF: Myles Cale | Wing | 6’6” B3: Tray Jackson | Forward | 6’9”
PF: Alexis Yetna | Forward | 6’8” B4: Tyler Powell | Guard | 6’5”
C: Ike Obiagu | Big | 7’2” B5: Jo Smith | Forward | 6’9”
Player Stats

• Jared Rhoden: Long guard that is a tough shot-maker in the midrange. Can post smaller players. Really
good wing defender. Not a great outside shooter or playmaker. The skill and size combination make him
a dynamic weapon, underrated player.
• Kadary Richmond: One of the better perimeter defenders in college basketball. Kills opposing guards,
can also defend wings really well. Good handle, great athlete, can make some plays. Not a good shooter,
but really good as a guard in the post.
• Myles Cale: Really good role wing. Doesn’t create too much offensively but works really well within his
role. Reall good defender with size and length. Good athlete.
• Ike Obiagu: Great rim protector. Decent athlete but doesn’t have the best coordination or hands.
Struggles within his offensive role.
• Alexis Yetna: Athletic forward who is really good defensively. Can provide secondary rim protection.
Capable spot up shooter. Isn’t asked to do much offensively.
• Jamir Harris: Really good shooter, creative guard that can run pick and roll. Will assume more
offensive load in the Aiken role. Not a bad defender.
• Tyrese Samuel: Plays backup 5, more versatile than Obiagu. Can do some switching and better feet on
the perimeter. More of an offensive threat. Good rim protector.
• Tray Jackson: Backup forward, somewhat in a 3 and D role. Can hit catch and shoot shots from the
perimeter. Also an athletic forward who provides good stuff defensively.
Scheme
• Set-heavy offense that can flow into a pick and roll or post up for a guard
• Versatile ball screen coverages; can switch, drop, or flat hedge
• They will stunt from a pass away, but don’t give a ton of help and funnel players to
their rim protectors
Strengths
• They have a massive starting lineup, full of plus length as well
• No weaknesses defensively with their starting group. Multiple elite wing defenders.
• They are a big and strong team; they use that well to get to the rim and also draw
fouls
• Excellent at protecting the rim, Obiagu is massive but the other players can provide
nice secondary rim protection
• Excellent at defending in pick and roll
• Versatile within their ball screen coverages depending on the personnel in the game
• They can go bigger and smaller, but their smaller lineups still have a ton of size
• Rhoden and Richmond good at posting up smaller players, which gives their offense an
interesting wrinkle
• Score well out of transition
• They do a nice job at preventing opponent post ups
• They do a great job of defending the 3-point line with all the length
• High offensive rebounding team
Weaknesses
• Outside shooting is a concern with this team at every position
• They lack playmaking in a major way
• Their scheme funnels a lot of shot towards the rim
• They aren’t very good in running pick and roll, finishers can struggle and they don’t
have great playmakers
• They are fairly reliant on Richmond and Rhoden to create offense, which leads to a lot
of shots to be taken
• They run some good sets, but can struggle to generate advantages out of them
because of the personnel
Evaluation
Seton Hall has been inconsistent throughout the season, but I am still higher than most on what they
can do in the tournament. The injury to Bryce Aiken is brutal, as he has had one of the more injury-
riddled college basketball careers in recent memory. He gave Seton Hall a real offensive weapon they
were lacking before. Harris somewhat fills that role, but not nearly as well. The reason I like Seton Hall is
the size and defensive versatility. All of their starters are above 6’5”, and only one rotation player is
below that height. Their center is massive, but they can also go to smaller lineups that are more
switchable. Even their smaller lineups are bigger than most teams’ normal lineups. Their perimeter
defense is exceptional with Richmond, Cale, and Rhoden. Obiagu is a great rim protector, and the
forwards are athletic and versatile. They have a ton of defensive potential. Offensively is where I have
concerns. The shooting and playmaking are poor at best. They are reliant on paint touches that are
difficult to generate. The guard’s ability to post up and hit tough shots helps but doesn’t lead to
necessarily efficient offense. This is where the Aiken injury hurts them. They have enough size to be
successful on offense against smaller teams. I can see this team making a run to the second weekend if
the matchups break right. Smaller teams are going to have a really difficult time dealing with them. They
are also big enough to give bigger teams just enough issues offensively to give themselves a chance. I
don’t really see much upside here without Aiken, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see this Seton Hall team
with an upset. I also wouldn’t leave out a lower seed with good size taking them out in round 1.
7.32. Miami
Depth Chart
Coach: Jim Larranaga
PG: Charlie Moore | Guard | 5’11” B1: Anthony Walker | Forward | 6’9”
SG: Kameron McGusty | Guard | 6’5” B2: Bensley Jospeh | Guard | 6’1”
SF: Isaiah Wong | Guard | 6’3” B3: Wooga Poplar | Guard | 6’5”
PF: Jordan Miller | Wing | 6’6” B4: Deng Gak | Forward | 6’11”
C: Sam Waardenburg | Forward | 6’10” B5: Rodney Miller | Big | 7’0”
Player Stats

• Kameron McGusty: High usage creator on the ball, good shooter that attacks the rim well. Versatile
offensive weapon. Really good in transition. Can handle the ball in ball screens. Good athlete and has
good size for his position and role.
• Isaiah Wong: Really athletic guard that can create shots. Good finisher around the rim and gets there
well off the dribble. Takes tough shots, shooting has been inconsistent. Good defender.
• Charlie Moore: Best playmaker on the team, really quick and has a good handle. Good shooter who
can also shoot off the dribble. Can get some paint touches. Really undersized but has been a high-level
point of attack defender this season.
• Sam Waardenburg: Forward that plays center for this team. Can hit spot up shots well. Doesn’t
protect the rim and isn’t great moving on the perimeter. Him playing the 5 opens up the floor a ton.
• Jordan Miller: Can hit open shots, good cutter within their system. Good athlete. Solid defensive
player. Really good athlete, can play a lot bigger than his size.
• Anthony Walker: Mostly a backup 5 for this team. Undersized, but can fit within the offense. Not
much of an offensive threat but fits better on defense with activity and athleticism.
• Bensley Jospeh: Plays limited minutes, good shooter that can handle the ball some. Undersized guard.
• Wooga Poplar: Less of a shooter than the other perimeter players on the team. Can attack some
closeouts. Decent defensive player.
Scheme
• 5-out offense with a stretch forward at center, read and react offense
• Hard show on ball screens
• Show a lot of help on drives, fly around in rotations to recover
Strengths
• Almost exclusively play 5-out, which can be difficult for teams to deal with
• They feature three dynamic guards in Wong, McGusty, and Moore that can score at all
three levels off the dribble. They are really tough to contain on the perimeter with their
space, they force a lot of help.
• Stretch 5 in Waardenberg that you have to respect from deep in their starting groups,
opening up a lot of lanes for driving, longer closeouts, and more cutting
• The guards score really well out of their spread pick and roll, Moore is also a good
playmaker in those actions
• Their spacing allows the guards to get a lot of self-generated paint touches
• They rarely turn the ball over on offense, their guards are good ball handlers
• Mostly will play with 5 shooters, making helping on drives more difficult
• They run out in transition really well
• They can be aggressive at the point of attack on defense and cause some issues there
Weaknesses
• They completely sacrifice defense to play their style on offense
• They are not very good at protecting the rim at all
• Opponents can very easily generate good looks against them, they play really small
and with players that are not very good defensively
• Pick and roll defense is not very good, they are asking a player that isn’t very mobile to
get out on the floor and smaller players to tag the roller.
• They are not a good rebounding team at all
• They do not have very much quality depth at all
• They give up a lot of 3s in their scheme and don’t close out well
• They don’t have any good post defenders
Evaluation
Miami is tough from an evaluation standpoint because of their unique style of play. Jim Larranaga has
completely dipped into a 5-out, motion and read heavy offense with his 3 guards that works really well.
The result of that is horrible defense that can’t stop anyone. They have arguably the worst defense of
any at-large team by a decent margin. Watching them, it can feel like everything they gain with great
offense they can give right back with poor defense. Offensively, they are fun to watch. Waardenberg
opens up a lot of possibilities for them with his ability to shoot the ball form deep. Miami spaces the
floor and allows their 3 guards to operate. Wong and McGusty are athletic and can really score at all 3
levels. The extra space in the lane makes them even more effective. Moore can score as well, but he is
the best playmaker of the bunch, using his quickness and handle to get into the defense and find
shooters on the perimeter. They operate well as cutters and all the guards use ball screens to their
advantage. Once they get on defense, it looks a lot worse. Miami is a really bad rim protecting team.
Their guards aren’t bad at the point of attack defensively, but they are generally small. They also
struggle to defend in ball screens. Once teams get them in rotation, they score fairly easily at the rim.
They also bring a lot of help within their system, which leads to high quality opponent looks from deep.
Facing any kind of post threat is also a challenge for Miami. In the tournament, I think their offensive
style can really give some teams issues. However, the types of teams that their offense succeeds against
are also the types of teams their defense struggles against. With the right matchup, Miami can win a
game in the tournament. Asking them to do more than that will be very dependent on matchups and
shooting. Their style of offense gives them a chance in March, despite how bad it makes their defense.
7.33. Colorado State
Depth Chart
Coach: Niko Medved
PG: Isaiah Stevens | Guard | 6’0” B2: Chandler Jacobs | Guard | 6’3”
SG: Kendle Moore | Guard | 5’11” B3: Jalen Lake | Guard | 6’4”
SF: John Tonje | Guard | 6’5” B3: Adam Thistlewood | Wing | 6’6”
PF: David Roddy | Forward | 6’5” B4: Isaiah Rivera | Guard | 6’5”
C: Dischon Thomas | Forward | 6’9” B5: James Moors | Forward | 6’10”
Player Stats

• David Roddy: One of the best and most unique players in the country. Guard in an undersized
forward’s body. Really good shooter, good ball handler, self-creates offense off the dribble, plus
playmaker. Really strong. Doesn’t move very well laterally, good athlete for size but not great.
• Isaiah Stevens: Really good ball handler and good athlete. Shoots the ball really well off the dribble,
can also attack downhill. Good playmaker as well. Good defensively on guards.
• John Tonje: Shooter that used to come off the bench, has earned a spot as a starter. Can really hit
tough shots. Can also handle the ball and create offense. Nice third option offensively.
• Kendle Moore: Really athletic small guard. Solid shooter and good ball handler. Gets into opponents at
the point of attack. Not a ton of offensive responsibility but can put up points if needed.
• Dischon Thomas: Center that is good at hitting catch and shoot jumpers and can make some passes.
Not very good in the post. Not a great rebounder or rim protector.
• Chandler Jacobs: Very athletic guard. Good handle and can create some shots. Dangerous in
transition. Not a great shooter. Good defender.
• Adam Thistlewood: Wing with decent size that has very little offensive responsibility. Does not often
shoot or handle the ball. His minutes have been inconsistent, but he can shoot it when given the chance.
• Jalen Lake: Mostly used as a shooter, results have been inconsistent. Has solid size and is a decent
perimeter defender.
• James Moors: Backup center, a little more of a traditional big. Finishes well around the rim and a
better rim protector.
• Isaiah Rivera: Limited role off the bench. Good athlete that can get out in transition and will make
some open shots. Good defender.
Scheme
• Mostly 4 out but can go 5 out in their motion offense with Princeton influence
• Play in the gaps, low man brings a lot of help on drives
• Drop coverage, will ice side ball screens
Strengths
• Floor is always well spaced, especially in 5 out looks. They get to the rim a lot and have
players that can create their own shot there in Roddy and Stevens, and even Tonje and
Jacobs off the bench.
• Roddy is a unique matchup issue for most teams. Can attack bigger players off the
dribble and comes off screens to shoot. Can also kill smaller players in the post.
• Really good in pick and rolls offensively. Floor is spaced well. Stevens and Roddy are
both good handlers, and Roddy is really good as the screener as well.
• Good shooting team. Most of their rotation players are plus shooters with some
dynamic weapons from deep.
• They have really good shot creators in Roddy and Stevens who can score at all 3 levels
• They do a great job of playing in gaps, providing a lot of help and preventing shots at
the rim
• They do a really good job of not turning the ball over, guards are good handlers
• They are a very good free throw shooting team
• Roddy is really good in the post, and floor spacing around him there is excellent
• A lot of positive cutting and movement in their offense
Weaknesses
• They can struggle to defend in pick and roll, ball handler often gets to where they
want as their big men aren’t great at executing their coverage
• Some of their players can get attacked in space defensively, and general point of
attack defense with this team is not very good
• They are not a good rim protecting team with their personnel
• They are a really small team up and down the lineup
• Not a very athletic team outside of the guard group
• They punt on the offensive glass to get back on defense in transition
• Defensive scheme gives up a ton of open looks from 3
• They can struggle to get to the paint on offense against bigger teams
• They don’t get out and run in transition much
Evaluation
After barely missing out on the tournament last season, Colorado State makes it in comfortably this
year. They have mostly done it on the offensive side of the ball, where they can give some better teams
trouble. The duo of Roddy and Stevens might be one of the more underrated ones in college basketball.
Roddy is a star at this level and a matchup nightmare for a lot of teams. The combination of shooting,
ball handling, and post ups makes for someone you need to bring help against. Stevens is a three-level
scorer who is really dangerous. The surrounding offensive talent also blends in well. There is shooting at
a lot of spots, good ball movers and cutters, and smart players that understand the goals of the offense.
They space the floor well and run a lot through their best players. They flow into secondary actions with
ease. Their spacing and use of screens can cause issues for some of the better teams. Defensively is
where I have concerns. They do a great job of keeping the ball outside of the paint in general, but the
result of that is giving up a lot of 3s. They need to bring a lot of help to counter their weak point of
attack defense and poor rim protection, but sometimes that isn’t enough. Colorado State is small and
not very athletic, making me wonder how they will scale to the biggest stages. They are well coached
and have a dangerous offensive scheme, which could lead them to a win in March. I’m not sure about
them winning more than one game unless shooting or matchup luck is really on their side. They’re
definitely a good team, but I don’t see the upside here in the tournament as much as others.
7.34. Michigan
Depth Chart
Coach: Juwan Howard
PG: DeVante Jones | Guard | 6’1” B1: Terrance Williams | Forward | 6’7”
SG: Eli Brooks | Guard | 6’1” B2: Brandon Johns Jr. | Forward | 6’8”
SF: Caleb Houstan | Wing | 6’8” B3: Kobe Bufkin | Guard | 6’4”
PF: Moussa Diabate | Forward | 6’11” B4: Frankie Collins | Guard | 6’1”
C: Hunter Dickinson | Big | 7’1” B5: Jace Howard | Wing | 6’7”
Player Stats

• Hunter Dickinson: Reall good post player and good passer. Has expanded his game to be a capable
shooter from the perimeter. Really interesting offensive weapon. Has good size, but poor athlete. Can
be killed in space defensively.
• DeVante Jones: Good playmaker in the pick and roll but hasn’t been enough of a threat to score.
Undersized but has a good frame, solid defender on guards. Has been getting better throughout the
season on the ball offensively.
• Moussa Diabate: Good athlete, fits well next to Dickinson. Uses athleticism to defend on the
perimeter and provide secondary rim protection. Not skilled, but finishes plays well offensively.
• Eli Brooks: Role player who can shoot the ball and play defense at the point of attack. Limit size and
athleticism holds him back from more use as a creator or switchability defensively.
• Caleb Houstan: Long forward who can shoot it off the catch really well. Has moments of shot creation
ability. Solid wing defender.
• Terrance Williams: Athletic forward who is a plus defender, provides some secondary rim protection.
Limited offensive role, good shooter on limited attempts.
• Brandon Johns Jr.: Stretch forward that hasn’t shot the ball well this season. Has good size and is a
decent athlete, plus defender.
• Frankie Collins: Quick guard that can handle in pick and roll and make some passing reads, very limited
shooter but has really interesting flashes as a crafty scorer.
• Kobe Bufkin: Creative guard who can create some offense. Has been inconsistent this season,
especially as a shooter. Good size and athlete.
Scheme
• Large playbook, run set heavy offense that promotes Dickinson’s ability and ball +
player movement
• Will play different coverages with Dickinson, have seen him hard show, hedge, or drop
• Can switch a lot off the ball
• More of a pack line, will do some denials from one pass away, stunt on drives
Strengths
• Dickinson is used well as a unique offensive weapon. Will post smaller players, can
pass, and with the improved shot can do more interesting stuff.
• Really good offensive sets. They run a lot of pro-level stuff, which gives them an
immediate advantage over most teams.
• Very good in terms of game planning. Have made some unique adjustments.
• They play a really big frontcourt, including players that come off the bench
• They are good within their defensive scheme forcing shots in the midrange. Generally
don’t overhelp too much on drives to still prevent 3s.
• Their big men are good finishers at the rim
• They have good point of attack defenders in Jones and Brooks
• Jones and Brooks do a good job of making plays out of pick and roll
• They generally play with good space within their dynamic offensive attack
Weaknesses
• Brutal pick and roll defense with Dickinson. There isn’t a coverage Michigan has found
that works with him. He is just too slow and not an athlete.
• Perimeter shot creation for this team has been an issue. Guards are decent in pick and
roll but asking them to create offense off the dribble doesn’t end up well.
• They don’t get up a lot of shots from the perimeter. A lot of their players outside of
Brooks and Houstan are reluctant.
• Poor rim protecting team. Dickinson is big but not an athlete at all.
• Dickinson and Diabate are not good at defending in the post
• Individual defenders can be attacked at times, either the lateral foot speed or general
size is an issue for most perimeter defenders
Evaluation
After being very highly ranked in the preseason, it has been a disappointing year for Michigan. There is a
combination of factors that have gone into that. Jones and Houstan haven’t been as good as people
expected. People also underrated the contributions last year’s players that are now pros. After a lot of
ups and downs, Michigan still makes the tournament as a solid team. They are best on the offensive side
of the ball. Juwan Howard coms from an NBA system and you can really tell. They run great stuff on
offense with a more set-based approach. It compliments them that they have a dynamic weapon in
Dickinson to run a lot of offense through. He is massive and scores well in the post. He has expanded his
game to be able to knock down 3s. The passing is the most unique part, as he can make reads from the
low post, elbow, or top of the key. He really opens up their playbook. I’m not too sure about the rest of
their offensive players. Jones and Brooks can do some stuff, but I don’t feel comfortable with either
being my primary ball handlers. Houstan and Diabate are good in their roles, but the roles are not large.
Defensively, this team does not have bad personnel outside of Dickinson. It’s just hard to build a defense
around him. Michigan has tried different stuff, but just dropping him and hoping for the best seems like
their best option. However, he is not much a of rim protector against bigger or more athletic players,
but Diabate does help there. The tradeoff of offense for defense is fascinating. The players that guard
him well are not the types that attack him on the other end, however there are a lot of systems that can
attack his defensive weaknesses. He is a remarkable offensive player, but he holds back their ceiling for
me. Matchups are massive for Michigan and will likely determine if they make the second weekend.
7.35. Ohio State
Depth Chart
Coach: Chris Holtmann
PG: Jamari Wheeler | Guard | 6’1” B1: Justin Ahrens | Guard | 6’6”
SG: Eugene Brown | Wing | 6’6” B2: Kyle Young | Big | 6’8”
SF: Malaki Branham | Wing | 6’5” B3: Meechie Johnson | Guard | 6’2”
PF: E.J. Liddell | Forward | 6’7” B4: Justice Sueing | Wing | 6’7”
C: Zed Key | Big | 6’8” B5: Cedric Russell | Guard | 6’2”
Player Stats

• E.J. Liddell: Versatile two-way forward. Best rim protector on the team, really strong frame and can
defend on the perimeter some. Solid three-level scorer with his improved shot. Good in the post. Also
used to pop out of ball screens. Really good rebounder.
• Malaki Branham: Three-level scoring threat. Really good game in the midrange but can hit shots from
deep and get all the way to the rim. Has good size for his position. Not a great first step or athlete but
can still get to his spots. Hits tough shots but can be inconsistent. Good wing defender.
• Jamari Wheeler: Best ball handler on the team, good pick and roll playmaker. Not too much of a
threat to score creating off the dribble. Capable shooter off the catch. Solid point of attack defender.
• Zed Key: Undersized big man. Very long arms and strong frame. Good rebounder. Can work in the
post, not a great passer out of it. Limited defensively as the 5.
• Justin Ahrens: Fantastic shooter with size. Constantly moving and can hit ridiculously tough shots. Not
very good off the dribble of defensively, has a very focused role.
• Meechie Johnson: Backup point guard, a little undersized but a quick and a solid handle. Capable
shooter, can run some ball screens. Hasn’t been great defensively, not too much of a threat to score.
• Kyle Young: Mostly a backup center, can run more pick and pop and will post up some. Solid
defensively, can move on the perimeter a little. Not great size or athleticism for the position.
• Eugene Brown: Big wing off the bench, solid athlete and good wing defender. Not a great shooter,
does not have a major offensive role.
• Justice Sueing: Really good 3 and D wing that’s been injured all season long. Versatile defender that
can really shoot it and has good size.
Scheme
• Play more of a pack line with aggressively helping in the gaps
• Ice side ball screens, mostly drop in middle ball screens
• Good mix of sets and playing out of certain alignments
• Will switch at times 1-4 or even 1-5
Strengths
• Liddell is a matchup issue for most teams. He plays the 4 but can overpower most 4s in
the post but can also score from the perimeter against bigger players.
• The combined shot creation ability of Liddell and Branham can really help them
generate offense if the set or action isn’t going anywhere
• Their frontcourt is really good at getting to the free throw line
• Very good shooting team, will generally have 4 capable shooters in the game at all
times and have a lethal shooter in Ahrens. Really good spacing at all times.
• Their frontcourt plyers are all really strong, helps them protect the rim. Also makes
them good at defending in the post, generally pushing larger players out.
• They excel at scoring out of the post. Key scores well and can go high-low with Liddell.
Liddell is a more versatile post player and can really hurt opposing 4s.
• Very good in ball screens. Branham is an excellent scorer out of them, and it’s most
effective with Liddell setting the screen. Spacing is generally good as well around them.
• They score the ball well in transition
• They have some lineup versatility
Weaknesses
• General guard play is an issue for this team. Wheeler is solid but not great, can also be
inconsistent. Same can be said about Johnson.
• They struggle to guard in pick and roll. The big men aren’t big enough to be effective
in drop but also don’t move their feet well on the perimeter.
• Conservative defensive scheme doesn’t force turnovers
• They lack interior size. They can get hurt at the rim at times.
• They can struggle to generate paint touches. Their two best players work a lot in the
midrange but aren’t always able to find easy looks at the rim.
• They give up a lot of quality looks from 3 with their scheme
• Their big men struggle if you can draw them away from the basket when on defense
Evaluation
Ohio State is yet another team that excels on one end of the court and really struggles on the other.
Ohio State has been able to generate some really good offense this season. They have a dynamic scorer
who is a matchup issue in Liddell, a good post player in Key, and a dynamic perimeter scorer in
Branham. They surround these players with shooting and some secondary ball handling. Holtmann runs
a good offensive system that plays to the strengths of these players. They can be a little reliant on
making tougher midrange shots and the inconsistent guard play can lead to inconsistencies in their
offense, which isn’t great for a team reliant on that end of the floor. Defense is a struggle for this team.
They don’t have general bad defenders, but it is tough to build a defense around their lack of interior
size. They try to prevent players from getting to the rim, but that effort is generally ineffective. The
frontcourt is decent at using their strength to defend at the rim when in position, but against a player
with a head of steam it is difficult. They are very poor in ball screen coverages. Key doesn’t give them
much versatility there and has to play drop because of lack of foot speed but isn’t effective. They can go
to different looks with Liddell at the 5, but that may give up too much interior size. I am lower on Ohio
State because they are more of a one-way team, but I don’t really trust the side of the ball they are
supposed to excel at. They can certainly make a second weekend run with some favorable matchups
and good shooting, but I would not bet on that.
8.36. TCU
Depth Chart
Coach: Jamie Dixon
PG: Mike Miles | Guard | 6’1” B1: Micah Peavy | Wing | 6’7”
SG: Damion Baugh | Guard | 6’3” B2: Francisco Farabello | Guard | 6’4”
SF: Chuck O’Bannon | Wing | 6’6” B3: Xavier Cork | Forward | 6’9”
PF: Emmanuel Miller | Forward | 6’7” B4: JaKobe Coles | Forward | 6’7”
C: Eddie Lampkin | Big | 6’11” B5: Souleymane Doumbia | Big | 6’11”
Player Stats

• Mike Miles: Really good lead guard, underrated player. Really good passer out of ball screens, good
ball handler and can shoot it off the dribble or on the move. Fantastic at getting to his spots and creating
offense. Above average defensively.
• Damion Baugh: Strong and athletic guard. Good finisher, not much of a creator. Still capable of doing
stuff on the ball. Really good defensive player on the perimeter.
• Chuck O’Bannon: Good spot up shooter, can crash the glass and finish in transition. Athletic wing that
is a good perimeter defender. Limited offensive skillset.
• Eddie Lampkin: Really strong center, decent athlete for his size. Not much of a rim protector. Great
rebounder, especially on offense.
• Emmanuel Miller: Athletic forward that scores on cuts, transition, and crashing the glass. Can attack
the rim off the dribble. Good defensive forward that has some versatility.
• Micah Peavy: Solid ball handler and can make plays inside the arc. Not a very good shooter. Versatile
defender with size.
• Francisco Farabello: Shooter off the bench, probably the best shooter on the team within his role. Not
the best defensive player and not going to do much off the dribble.
• Xavier Cork: Good offensive rebounder, better rim protector as a backup. Good athlete. Pure play
finisher, not a shooting threat.
Scheme
• Lampkin will mostly play drop, others can play at the level
• A lot of switching 1-4 defensively
Strengths
• They are a really athletic team
• They attack the offensive glass and get a ridiculous amount of their own misses.
Arguably the best offensive rebounding team in the country.
• Miles is a good lead guard who is capable of getting to his spots and creating for
himself or others
• Really good at defending in pick and rolls, helpful that their guards are so good at
fighting through the screen
• Really strong point of attack defense from different spots, perimeter players are also
versatile and can do some switching
• They do a good job of leveraging their athleticism into paint touches
• They use their length to contest shots well on the perimeter
• They have some decent perimeter shot creators, especially with Miles
Weaknesses
• They shoot the ball really poorly from the perimeter. They only have a couple of
players that are threats to score from beyond the arc.
• They turn the ball over a wild amount. It’s really hard for them to create advantages at
times on offense with the complete lack of shooting.
• Lampkin is not a very good rim protector, and they don’t prevent shots at the rim
• Despite Miles being really good in pick and roll, the lack of spacing or lob threat makes
them really struggle in ball screens
• They struggle at the free throw line
• They aren’t good at defending in transition despite the athleticism
Evaluation
TCU has been a very solid team through the gauntlet of the Big 12. They are worthy of a tournament
selection, but there are major concerns here. The fun part of TCU is how athletic they are. They are one
of the more athletic teams in the country across their 1-4. They utilize this to be a really good defensive
team. They can switch in a lot of spots and really apply pressure to the ball. They execute their no
middle scheme well with point of attack defenders that direct the ball towards the baseline, and the
help has the speed and length to trap the box effectively. They are most fun when their defense turns to
offense. Offensively is where I really struggle to see it with this team. They are one of the worst shooting
teams of any at-large team in the tournament. They only have two players I’d be concerned about
hitting shots. They just have zero floor spacing whatsoever, which kills a lot of their actions. Mike Miles
is a really high-level guard. He is great at getting to his spots, but he can struggle at times without any
perimeter shot making around him. TCU also doesn’t have a lob threat at times, making Miles’ life even
more difficult. They are athletic and the guards can handle the ball, leading to some moments of self-
generated paint touches. However, you can live with really helping and backing off them on the
perimeter. TCU generates decent half-court offense with ridiculous offensive rebounding. They are one
of the best offensive rebounding teams in the country. I just question how sustainable of a strategy that
is in March. The shooting is the biggest concern, and that has a lot of negative effects on other areas of
the game. They could struggle with teams that can match their athleticism or have more size than them.
They also don’t have very much rim protection, which is an issue for a team that primarily wins with
defense. The half-court offense is painful, and the defense is really good but not great. They are still a
very good defensive team with a great guard and other good guard play. Matchups are going to be very
important here. They can match anyone athletically but would definitely prefer teams that can’t match
them. Making the second weekend will be all about matchups and some opponent shooting luck.
8.37. Michigan State
Depth Chart
Coach: Tom Izzo
PG: A.J. Hoggard | Guard | 6’3” B1: Malik Hall | Forward | 6’7”
SG: Max Christie | Guard | 6’6” B2: Tyson Walker | Guard | 6’0”
SF: Gabe Brown | Wing | 6’7” B3: Jaden Akins | Guard | 6’4”
PF: Joey Hauser | Forward | 6’9” B4: Julius Marble | Big | 6’11”
C: Marcus Bingham | Big | 6’11” B5: Mady Sissoko | Big | 6’9”
Player Stats

• Gabe Brown: Good shooter with size. Used well off screens and spotting up. Also gets a lot in
transition. Not much of a creator offense. Plus wing defender.
• Max Christie: Really dynamic shooter with good size for a guard, shot has just been inconsistent this
season. Plus perimeter defender. Not a great ball handler or playmaker.
• Malik Hall: Solid offensive creator. Forward that can punish smaller players in the post, also a good
shooter on limited attempts. Not a great athlete, average positional defender.
• Marcus Bingham: Best defensive player on the team. Really good rim protector, decent movement
ability. Capable of some shooting. Far overused in the post.
• A.J. Hoggard: Best playmaker on the team but not as much of a scorer. Not a very good shooter and
inefficient shot-taker. Plays at his own pace. Can get some paint touches. Decent defensively.
• Joey Hauser: Good spot up shooter, also used to pick and pop. Not much of a threat outside of
shooting and some slips. Poor athlete, has good size but is attacked defensively.
• Tyson Walker: Good playmaker and really good point of attack defender. Not much of a shooter, has
his moments as a scorer creating some looks for himself.
• Jaden Aikens: Has flashes of offensive creation ability combined with good defense, but a lot of the
offense is flashes right now. Isn’t trusted to do much right now.
• Julius Marble: Good post player and can finish well around the rim. Has good size and strength. Isn’t
the best athlete, has a bigger build, which limits his perimeter defense and rim protection.
Scheme
• Hard show on pick and rolls
• Pick and roll heavy offense, a lot of roll and replace
• Play heavy in the gaps
Strengths
• Floor is mostly going to be spaced with good shooters, the worse shooters are either
ball handler or are setting screens
• Offense flows fairly well between on and off ball screening actions, the pieces fit in a
way that makes sense
• Defend pick and rolls really well within their scheme
• Bingham does a good job of protecting the rim
• They run through 9 players that are all solid rotation players
• Guards do a good job of making the right plays in pick and roll
• They do a very good job running pick and roll and roll/replace, good spacing and
guards find shooters well out of it
• Point of attack defense is really good at the guard spots
• They play with good size from the 2-5 positions
• They are a really good shooting team despite not hunting a ton of 3s
• They do a good job of using their length to contest shots
Weaknesses
• They don’t have any good individual shot creators
• They rarely get self-generated paint touches
• Limited number of ball handlers, leads to a lot of turnovers
• Their scheme allows for opponents to shoot a lot of 3s
• Post ups are a large part of their offense, although they are not great with them
• Really poor in transition in terms of finishing
• They don’t have great lateral quickness at all spots on the perimeter
• Post defense struggles, especially against oversized opponent post players
• They are not very fast or athletic overall as a team
Evaluation
Michigan State has been on an up and down ride throughout the season. They’ve had inconsistent play
and results from many of their players. They have a lot of good players, but they are missing that group
of elite talent to push them to be a contender. Unlike most Michigan State teams, this version has
succeeded more with their offense. Their lead guards are limited scoring and shooting threats, but each
are good passers. They have bigger forwards that can shoot the ball off the catch. Tom Izzo has used this
to run a lot of roll/replace, which has been really effective. Michigan State does a good job of spacing
the floor well with these actions and are one of the most efficient shooting teams in the country. They
just lack real creation or anyone that can put enough pressure on the rim to create shots for others
outside of their sets. They can’t take advantage of how good their shooting has been because of it. They
also feed the ball into the post a lot within their offense with mediocre results. Defensively, Michigan
State started off the season well but has tapered off. Their scheme is designed to prevent shots in the
paint, but they don’t do a great job of executing that. Bingham is a good rim protector, but you can get
him away from the rim with the pick and roll coverage they run. They have really strong point of attack
defense, but perimeter foot speed at other spots is a concern. Michigan State is good defensively but
isn’t very good against teams that are quicker or have good shooters. Michigan State is capable of
making it to the second weekend of the tournament, but I don’t see the upside here. They have such
limited creation, and I don’t think they scale too well against more athletic teams. I’d say this group is
unlikely to make a run to the second weekend to me without getting some opponent shooting luck.
8.38. USC
Depth Chart
Coach: Andy Enfield
PG: Boogie Ellis | Guard | 6’3” B1: Ethan Anderson | Guard | 6’1”
SG: Drew Peterson | Wing | 6’8” B2: Joshua Morgan | Big | 6’11”
SF: Max Agbonkpolo | Forward | 6’8” B3: Reese Waters | Guard | 6’5”
PF: Isaiah Mobley | Forward | 6’10” B4: Isaiah White | Wing | 6’7”
C: Chevez Goodwin | Big | 6’9” B5: Kobe Johnson | Forward | 6’5”
Player Stats

• Isaiah Mobley: Really skilled big man. Has expanded his game beyond the arc this season. Good passer
and can handle the ball. Not a great post threat. Plus defender. Really smart player.
• Boogie Ellis: Creative lead guard, best player at self-generating offense. Good shooter. Can take poor
shots at times, not much of a playmaker either. Solid point of attack defender.
• Drew Peterson: Big wing that can handle the ball. Good passer in ball screens. Capable shooter. Can
also post smaller guards. Solid defender with his length.
• Chavez Goodwin: Athletic and long 5. Does a good job of protecting the rim. Isn’t a great finisher
outside of dunks. Solid movement skills on the perimeter.
• Ethan Anderson: Smaller guard with a strong frame. Guards on the perimeter really well. Can make
some passing reads, but limited scorer. Below average shooter.
• Max Agbonkpolo: Big, athletic forward who defends well. Can guard multiple positions. Shoots the
ball but shot has not fallen.
• Joshua Morgan: Big backup 5. Protects the rim really well, best shot blocker on the team. Not very
good on the offensive end, can finish some dunks but limited.
• Reese Waters: 3 and D wing. Limited offensive role but can hit open shots. Solid defender at the point
of attack with decent size.
• Isaiah White: Athletic energy wing off the bench. Shooting hasn’t been there this season but defends
well on the perimeter.
Scheme
• Run a lot of 3 out and 4 out, can pop big men out and have them used as screeners
or handlers, motion-heavy offense
• They won’t help much from one pass away, will force actions towards their rim
protectors
• Will play a lot at the level of screens
• They mix in some 2-3 zone
Strengths
• They run some of the bigger lineups in the country
• They do a really good job at contesting shots at the rim. They have a ton of size and a
lot of different players that contest shots.
• They really excel at post defense with good primary defenders, and can dig down with
active guards and rotations
• They use their size to grab a lot of offensive rebounds, especially with Mobley and
Goodwin lineups
• The smaller players that take shots are all good shooters, some of the bigger ones can
shoot it as well
• They defend well in primary pick and roll actions
• Point of attack defense at most spot is a plus, especially with their oversized players
Weaknesses
• They do not space the floor well at all, a lot of non-shooting threats play
• General playmaking off the dribble can be an issue for this team. Their guards and
surrounding personnel don’t lend themselves to spread pick and rolls.
• Generating self-created paint touches isn’t something they are great at, they don’t
really have high-level creators of offense
• Foot speed on the perimeter can be an issue at times with their personnel
• Despite the size, they don’t work well out of the post. None of their players are good
low post scorers.
• They give up a lot of 3s despite their scheme, can be susceptible to drive and kicks
• They don’t force any turnovers
• Really poor free throw shooting team
• They don’t have a lot of functional depth
Evaluation
USC has been a highly ranked team for much of the season. Most of the appeal of this squad is with their
size. They run some massive lineups, often featuring four players that are 6’8” or taller. It’s size that not
many other teams can match. They have used this size to build a good defense. It’s tough to score on
this team on the interior. They don’t just have one good rim protector; they have multiple that may be
on the floor at the same time. The perimeter defenders also do a good job of contesting interior looks.
They won’t bring a ton of help from the perimeter because they trust their interior defense. This gives
them good defensive results. The size also drives a lot of their offense. They often play with two players
inside the arc, but either big can step out and run handoffs or set ball screens. They also have some
players that can shoot the ball. Unfortunately, this team has size that doesn’t lead to a ton of
functionality for me. The offense is incapable of really capitalizing on the size because the big men aren’t
very good in the post. They don’t have the requisite spacing to maximize their size advantage. They also
don’t have guards that are great pick and roll operators, and that plus the lack of spacing makes it so
they can’t use their bigger players as major lob threats. They also struggle with general self-creation
from the perimeter. Defensively, there are holes as well. They can struggle to contain the ball on the
perimeter, and still give up a good amount of 3s despite their scheme. They have size, but don’t have
the skill to make a deep tournament push without some luck. I’m lower on the Trojans than most.
8.39. Indiana
Depth Chart
Coach: Mike Woodson
PG: Xavier Johnson | Guard | 6’3” B1: Trey Galloway | Wing | 6’4”
SG: Parker Stewart | Guard | 6’5” B2: Rob Phinisee | Guard | 6’1”
SF: Miller Kopp | Wing | 6’8” B3: Tamar Bates | Guard | 6’5”
PF: Race Thompson | Forward | 6’8” B4: Jordan Geronimo | Forward | 6’6”
C: Trayce Jackson-Davis | Big | 6’9” B5: Michael Durr | Big | 7’0”
Player Stats

• Trayce Jackson-Davis: Best player, offense runs through him. Good in the post, very left hand
dominant but can spin both ways. Not a threat to shoot and limited in making post reads. Good
defensive player around the rim using his length.
• Xavier Johnson: Primary ball handler. Really quick and has a good handle. Plus passing ability. Shot has
a hitch and is a little inconsistent. Has grown as a scorer in ball screens. Very good defender.
• Race Thompson: Strong forward, good athlete. Good defender against power forwards, can guard a
little on the perimeter. Solid in the post against 4s. Very limited shooter.
• Parker Stewart: Really good shooter, highest volume guy on the team. Not a very good shot creator,
limited in size and athleticism. Has some ability to pull up in the midrange. Average defensively.
• Miller Kopp: Big wing who can really shoot it. Isn’t used as a movement shooter but is capable in that
capacity. Limited athlete laterally, he can be attacked defensively despite the size.
• Trey Galloway: Good change of pace off the bench. Pushes the tempo, good athlete. Really defends
well on the wing. Good passer and finisher, good touch on floaters. Just can’t shoot it.
• Rob Phinisee: Very good defender on the ball. Capable ball handler and get him some shots. Really
inefficient scorer. Solid playmaker.
• Tamar Bates: Intriguing guard, can hit shots at all three levels off the dribble. Creative scorer. Can
make some passing reads. Good defender on the ball. Young Freshman and makes a ton of mistakes.
• Jordan Geronimo: Very athletic wing that has struggled to find his offensive role. Shot hasn’t fallen
from deep. Good cutter. Really good wing defender, can also protect the rim some.
• Michael Durr: Big backup center that plays in a very limited role. Asked to set screens, grab rebounds,
and protect the rim. Solid in his role.
Scheme
• Inside-out heavy offense. Set-based approach designed to play through big men
• They will bring ball pressure and can deny from one pass away, but also play in a pack
line style and will help very heavily from one pass away on drives
• Centers can hard show, play at the level, or drop. Personnel dependent.
Strengths
• They do a great job of defending shots at the rim. Jackson-Davis has done well as a
primary rim protector, with Thompson and Geronimo providing help there.
• They do an excellent job within their defensive scheme of keeping shots away from the
rim, flood the paint on drives.
• They have two good offensive players in the post in Jackson-Davis and Thompson that
their offense generally runs through, not everyone has two players to guard both. Their
best offense comes from when teams have to double, then play out of that.
• They have strong point of attack defense at the 1 spot in Johnson and Phinisee
• Style of offensive play allows them to get to the line a good amount
• Ball pressure can really bother some teams without a good primary
• Frontcourt is very good at finishing possessions with rebounds
Weaknesses
• Offense is very stagnant and poorly spaced. Two big men are often in each other’s
way. There is a lack of motion to create good looks for shooters or better matchups for
the big men. The number of reluctant shooters that play doesn’t help either.
• Lack of playmaking or shot creating from the perimeter is an issue at times
• They are poor in pick and rolls on both ends. Can’t run them without space or shooting
off the dribble. Can’t guard them with some of their guards and Trayce.
• Jackson-Davis struggle with opponents that match his size
• They are a very poor free throw shooting team as a whole
• They give up a lot of opponent 3s with their defensive scheme
• Defensive scheme does not force a ton of turnovers
• Woodson is reluctant to try different groups
• Jackson-Davis does not do a great job of defending in the post
• Good team in terms of strength but they lack general athleticism
Evaluation
Indiana is another one of these tough evaluations because of how slanted they are to one end of the
floor. The results have not been there for this team, but there is some potential of their style of play
working better against some other teams outside of their conference. Indiana has made the tournament
because of defense. They play a scheme that works to prevent shots at the rim. They heavily bring help
in the gaps and try to keep their center around the rim to contest as much as possible. Jackson-Davis has
done a good job as their primary rim protector this season, anchoring a strong defense. Thompson and
Geronimo are also good secondary rim protectors. They also have some plus defenders at the point of
attack, allowing them to play aggressively on the ball. The issue with Indiana is the offense is poor. They
play through Jackson-Davis and Thompson, but their actions lack the fluidity and creativity to really put
pressure on the defense. They are often in each other’s way instead of playing in complimentary roles.
Woodson also hasn’t figured out how to use their shooters in Stewart and Kopp in advantageous ways.
It doesn’t help them that they lack perimeter shot creation or aggressive shooters outside of two
players, although Johnson has started to figure some stuff out as of late. The offense doesn’t scale
against bigger teams very well. Defensively there are also some issues. They give up a lot of open 3s
within their scheme. They do not do a very good job of defending in the post. Ball screen coverages can
be problematic for them. This team definitely has enough talent to win a game in March, but they
haven’t been able to put it together. The matchup will be massive.
8.40. Rutgers
Depth Chart
Coach: Steve Pickiell
PG: Geo Baker | Guard | 6’4” B1: Aundre Hyatt | Wing | 6’6”
SG: Caleb McConnell | Wing | 6’7” B2: Mawot Mag | Forward | 6’7”
SF: Paul Mulcahy | Wing | 6’6” B3: Dean Reiber | Forward | 6’10”
PF: Ron Harper Jr. | Forward | 6’6” B4: Jalen Miller | Guard | 6’2”
C: Cliff Omoruyi | Big | 6’11” B5: Jaden Jones | Wing | 6’8”
Player Stats

• Ron Harper Jr.: Really versatile undersized forward. Can handle the ball, make good passing reads,
post up, and shoot from deep. Strange combination of skills makes him difficult to matchup with. Foot
speed and general athleticism is an issue defensively.
• Geo Baker: Best perimeter shot creator, most used in pick and roll. Can hit tough shots but shot
selection can be questionable. Can make some passes. Solid size and athleticism, decent defensively.
• Paul Mulcahy: Unique big guard that will utilize the post a lot. Really good passer in general, especially
out of the post. Can make catch and shoot threes. Solid defensively.
• Caleb McConnell: Best perimeter defender on the team. Absolutely elite. Uses length really well to
defend the other team’s best player. Limited offensive role. Not much of a shooting threat.
• Cliff Omoruyi: Athletic center. Good rim runner and lob threat, great dunker. Can move his feet well in
different coverages defensively. Solid rim protector.
• Aundre Haytt: Athletic wing-sized defender off the bench. Can guard multiple positions and provides a
little secondary rim protection. Isn’t a shooter and limited slashing offensive role.
• Mawot Mag: More of a forward off the bench. Defends with high motor and plus athleticism. Very
limited offensive role, isn’t a shooter.
• Dean Reiber: Plays backup center in a limited role. Can shoot the ball some, has good size. Decent at
protecting the rim.
Scheme
• Will play a good amount of 2-3 matchup zone
• Will play a lot at the level of the screen but have some versatility. Can switch 1-4, but
also switch at all spots at times.
• Will show help on drives, more of a pack line team
Strengths
• They play with a lot of size. 6’6” and above at 4 spots, and Baker has good size for a 1.
Bench also has a ton of size.
• They have one of the best wing defenders in the country in McConnell. Allowing him to
guard the other teams’ best player is a luxury.
• Overall size gives them multiple options on defense. Opens up good zone looks.
• They defend well in pick and roll. Combination of guards and Omoruyi is good there.
• Defend with an athletic center in Omoruyi who can defend the rim and is versatile
• Omoruyi is a very good finisher from the dunker or on lobs
• Their wings can generate offense out of the post, all of Mulcahy, Harper, and
McConnell can post up
• They have multiple players that can initiate offense in Baker, Mulcahy, and Harper. All
of them can run actions out of ball screens.
• It is tough to run general actions against the length and versatility of their defense
Weaknesses
• Offense can struggle to generate good looks inside the arc. Players don’t really have
quick first steps or a great handle.
• They lack playmaking or a true lead guard. They have multiple good players, but no
one to feel comfortable about handling a lot of their offense.
• They play multiple reluctant shooters together on the floor at the same time.
McConnell does not get guarded much.
• They do not do nearly as well on either end against teams that can match their size
• Despite the size, they are not the most athletic group outside of Omoruyi
• Bench is very questionable. Not very many good minutes off the bench.
• They have some tough shot makers, but they default to taking tougher looks too often
• They will give up a lot of good looks from 3 with their scheme
• Omoruyi is not a great post defender, and Reiber off the bench is really poor there
• The overall level of ball and player movement at times within their offense is not great
Evaluation
Rutgers started off the season incredibly slow but have picked it up in the back end of conference play
to earn their spot in the tournament. They have mostly done this with their defense. They have a ton of
size and length, putting out one of the bigger starting groups in college basketball. This makes it hard to
get in the paint and finish against them. It also allows them to play a decent amount of zone, which can
stagnate opposing offenses in the right matchup. Omoruyi is the anchor of the defense, and he has done
a good job of protecting the rim and can play in more aggressive ball screen coverages. McConnell is
arguably the best wing defender in college basketball, and Rutgers uses him well on that end.
Offensively, this team has some interesting notes. They have multiple players that can handle the ball in
ball screens, while also being able to post up with multiple players. They have some tough shot makers
as well. The overall playmaking or individual ability to get two feet in the paint is just not there. Outside
of lobs to Omoruyi, this is not a good team at scoring around the rim. They live off a tough shot diet.
They don’t have good shooting. Despite their size, the general lack of athleticism shows on this end.
They also lack any kind of offensive punch off the bench. Teams that can match their size or can really
shoot it should give them some issues. They can win a game in the right matchup, but I don’t see them
making it beyond that without some luck.
8.41. North Carolina
Depth Chart
Coach: Hubert Davis
PG: RJ Davis | Guard | 6’0” B1: Kerwin Walton | Wing | 6’5”
SG: Caleb Love | Guard | 6’4” B2: Puff Johnson | Wing | 6’8”
SF: Leaky Black | Wing | 6’8” B3: Justin McKoy | Forward | 6’8”
PF: Brady Manek | Forward | 6’9” B3: Dontrez Styles | Guard | 6’6”
C: Armando Bacot | Big | 6’10” B4: D’Marco Dunn | Guard | 6’4”
Player Stats

• Caleb Love: Primary ball handler, big guard who has some athleticism. Good shooter who has deep
range off the dribble. Can make some passing reads. Doesn’t get to the basket a ton and not a great
finisher. Can often settle. Solid defensive player.
• Armando Bacot: A lot of offense runs through him in the post. Very good post player. Also a very good
rebounder. Not very good defensively, tough to build a scheme around. Undersized and doesn’t move
well on the perimeter. Not a great athlete.
• RJ Davis: Crafty guard who can shoot the ball off the dribble. Good in a spot up and secondary ball
handler role. Not a great playmaker. The size and frame become an issue on defense.
• Leaky Black: Great wing defender. Best defender on the team by a mile. Mostly will handle the
toughest assignment. Has good defensive versatility. Offensive skill has improved but still limited. Now is
at least capable of hitting open shots, but reluctant shooter.
• Brady Manek: Lethal shooter, especially for his position. Good cutter and mover off the ball. Will
shoot off movement and can hit contested shots. Defensive liability, will often get attacked.
• Kerwin Walton: Excellent shooter with good size. Shots have not fallen quite as well this year, but still
a weapon. Solid defender with his size.
• Puff Johnson: Role player off the bench, used for his defense and high motor. Good size. Overall
offense is an issue, not much of a shooter.
• Justin McKoy: Can play some backup center for this team, really strong and has some defensive
versatility. Undersized for the role he is asked to play. Not a great shooter either.
Scheme
• 4 out 1 in offense, mostly play through sets
• Manek will mostly hard show, Bacot will mostly play at the level
• Play more of an NBA style defense; try to guide players away from the middle, don’t
help from the strong side corner, get in early from the weakside
Strengths
• Having two guards that can shoot it off the dribble from range and handle the ball with
Davis and Love can make it tough with more conservative ball screen coverages
• The floor is usually spaced with at least 3 high-level catch and shoot threats
• Bacot operates really well in the post plus the floor is always spaced really well
• Great defensive rebounding team, Bacot is elite there
• They do a solid job of executing their scheme and preventing shots around the rim
• One of the better teams at playing defense without fouling
• Davis and Love are good in transition with Manek getting a lot of 3s there as well
• They run good offensive sets designed to play to their offensive strengths, a lot of
spread ball screens with different and more complex variations
Weaknesses
• It’s impossible to build a good defense around the 4/5 combination of Manek and
Bacot. Both are just too limited on that end of the floor.
• They really lack depth, not many players off the bench that are trusted if any
• They lack defensive playmakers and also play a conservative scheme, turnovers are
rarely forced by them
• Generating paint touches from the perimeter can be an issue for them, the guards
tend to really settle from the perimeter far too often
• General playmaking is an issue, both guards better scorers than playmakers
• Post defense is bad with both Manek and Bacot
• They really struggle in pick and roll defense. Their coverage often asks a smaller player
to tag the roller with slow players recovering, which leads to layups.
• General defense at the point of attack can be an issue for them
• They are not a very athletic team
• Interior size is lacking for them, rim protection can be an issue
Evaluation
North Carolina has had an up and down year, but I actually like the job Hubert Davis has done in his first
year. I can see the vision he has for this team, leading them into a more modern style of play from what
Roy Williams was doing. The strength of this team is on the offensive side of the ball. Davis and Love are
both dynamic offensive pieces because of their handle and ability to shoot off the dribble with range.
They are effective scoring in ball screens and other actions because of it. Bacot is a good centerpiece for
them, being a really effective post player. Manek is a great fit for the system as a whole as an absolutely
lethal shooter with the size of a forward. Davis runs more of a modern 4 out offense with great spacing
and good set plays. Defensively, this team has struggled. It’s just impossible to build a good defense with
their personnel. Hubert Davis has done an admirable job, giving them a more NBA style defensive
scheme that does the job of trying to prevent paint touches. The personnel just isn’t very good for
executing. The combination of average point of attack defense, below average rim protection, and
attackable players (especially Manek) leads to a lot of breakdowns for them. They have offensive issues
as well. They can be reliant on making tough shots at times. The guards also take a lot of really tough
ones when they don’t have to. Playmaking is not the forte of either guard. Against better post
defenders, Bacot is not as effective without great size or athleticism. This team can win a game in round
1 with their shooting, spacing, and post presence, but I struggle to find upside here with the defense.
This is not a good enough offensive team in my opinion to be as slanted as they are to that end.
9.42. UAB
Depth Chart
Coach: Andy Kennedy
PG: Jordan Walker | Guard | 5’11” B1: Tavin Lovan | Wing | 6’4”
SG: Michael Ertel | Guard | 6’2” B2: Rongie Gordon | Forward | 6’8”
SF: Quan Jackson | Wing | 6’4” B3: Jamal Johnson | Guard | 6’4”
PF: KJ Buffen | Forward | 6’7” B4: Justin Brown | Wing | 6’6”
C: Trey Jemison | Big | 7’0” B5: Tony Toney | Guard | 6’2”
Player Stats

• Jordan Walker: Absolutely unbelievable shooter. Has ridiculous range on the shot. Shoots off the
dribble and gets enough elevation to make contested looks. Great at moving without the ball. Might be
the best shooter in the tournament. Also quick and crafty as a ball handler and finisher. Really good
playmaker. Size holds him back when dealing with pressure and on defense at times.
• Michael Ertel: Another fantastic shooter and shot maker. Not quite as good as Walker, but can really
hit tough shots outside the paint. Not very athletic, struggles to get to the rim, and a little left hand
dominant.
• Quan Jackson: Great perimeter defender, easily the best wing defender on the team. Makes a ton of
plays defensively. High motor and is all over the place on that end. Has some ability to slash and handle
the ball offensively but is not a shooter and can make some poor decisions.
• KJ Buffen: Really athletic forward, high-major transfer. Can finish well around the rim, really slashes
well and can post mismatches. Good defender with versatility. Really good rebounder for his position.
• Trey Jemison: Big 7-footer who does the big man stuff for this team. Sets good screens, rebounds, and
contests shots around the rim. Not very good with moving his feet on the perimeter. Very foul prone.
• Tavin Lovan: Athletic wing off the bench, good slasher and cutter. Not a shooter at all. Good perimeter
defender off the bench.
• Rongie Gordon: Plays backup 5 for this team, smaller but more athletic and gives them some
defensive versatility. Allows them to play faster and can take advantage of his speed. Not a shooter and
not as good of a rebounder, but a solid rim protector for his size.
Scheme
• 4 out offense with sets designed for shooters and spacing
• Will mix in a good amount of zone on defense. Can go with a full court zone press, ¾
court zone press, 1-3-1 zone, or 2-3 zone
Strengths
• Jordan Walker is such a ridiculous matchup issue for most teams. You have to pick him
up 30-35 feet from the rim, he has ridiculous gravity as a shooter.
• UAB does a really good job of running offensive sets that weaponize Walker and Ertel.
Floppy is their go to set, but they have many other options and counters.
• They have some size and athleticism in the frontcourt that allows them to get a lot of
offensive rebounds
• They don’t turn the ball over a lot offensively
• Their guards can get into opponents defensively and force some turnovers
• They have a lot of defensive versatility with a lot of different coverages they can throw
at teams. It often confuses opponents when they can switch between different defenses
so seamlessly.
• They are a good finishing team at the rim, multiple players can slash and the two
shooters open up the floor for other players
• They do a good job of preventing shots at the rim
• Really dangerous at scoring out of ball screens with Walker and Ertel
• They will really push the ball in transition, which is dangerous
• Their drop coverage has done a really good job in preventing anything easy
• They defend well in the post with Jemison and even Buffen
Weaknesses
• Point of attack defense at the 1 and 2 can be a question mark
• They have a major lack of shooting outside of Walker and Ertel
• When teams send two to the ball on Walker, sometimes they are not great at taking
advantage of that
• Heavy length and pressure can bother them to some extent
• They are a heavy foul team without a ton of depth
• They can be prone to taking a lot of tough shots
• Teams that have a guard that can really shoot off the dribble or a 5 that can space the
floor could be able to attack their defense
Evaluation
UAB plays in one of the better conferences that only sends one team to the tourney, and they are one of
the better teams from a one bid league. They have done this with an absolute superstar in Jordan “Jelly”
Walker. Walker is a ridiculous shooter with crazy range that absolutely changes the base coverages of
opponents. It’s wild what he can do; he can win a game with his shooting. Ertel is another shot maker
that plays right next to him. Around those two, they have some good slashers and cutters, but their
offense is designed for those two to score. Defensively, they will throw a lot of different coverages at
teams, and they have an elite defender in Jackson. They also have a 7-footer in Jemison roaming the
lane. This is a very good team, but I do have concerns. When Walker gets blitzed, are the rest of the
pieces good enough to consistently generate looks against a 4 on 3? I am also a little concerned about
their backcourt against real size and pressure. Defensively, their point of attack defense in the backcourt
is not great. They may have enough size on the back line and different coverages to mitigate this, but
Ertel and Walker are not an ideal defensive pairing. This team is also a little reliant on tough shot
making, which can go away at any moment. Walker is such a matchup issue that this team can certainly
win a game, but they would need some luck to pull it off.
9.43. Davidson
Depth Chart
Coach: Bob McKillop
PG: Foster Loyer | Guard | 6’0” B1: Grant Huffman | Guard | 6’3”
SG: Michael Jones | Guard | 6’5” B2: Nelson Boachie-Yiadom | Forward | 6’8”
SF: Hyunjung Lee | Wing | 6’7” B3: Desmond Watson | Guard | 6’5”
PF: Sam Mennenga | Forward | 6’9” B4: Emory Lanier | Guard | 6’3”
C: Luka Brajkovic | Forward | 6’10” B5: David Kristensen | Forward | 6’10”
Player Stats

• Hyunjung Lee: Lethal shooter with size. Might be the best wing shooter in the country. Really good off
of movement and excellent at moving without the ball. Can also shoot off ball screens. Can attack
closeouts.
• Luka Brajkovic: Really good post player, good touch and footwork. Can make passing reads out of the
post or from the perimeter. Not bad defensively, but average positional size and isn’t a great athlete.
Capable shooter from the perimeter when open.
• Foster Loyer: Really good shooter. Initiates the offense well and can make some plays. Undersized and
not very athletic at all, can definitely struggle with size. Excellent moving off the ball.
• Michael Jones: Really good shooter that can shoot off screens or movement. Doesn’t handle the ball
at all. Not a great athlete or defender.
• Sam Mennenga: Worst shooter in the starting group. Good cutter. Solid defensively with more size
than some of the other players. Good rebounder. Can play some backup 5.
• Grant Huffman: Less of a shooter and ball handler but can fit within the system. Decent ball handler.
• Nelson Boachie-Yiadom: Limited offensive role to cutting. Solid defensively with more athleticism
than many other players, can contest shots and move his feet.
• Desmond Watson: Limited offensive guard but can provide a little change of pace. Solid defensively.
Doesn’t shoot it well.
Scheme
• Spread motion offense based on player movement, screening, and reads
• Flat ball screen coverage
• Pack line, they bring very heavy help in the gaps and from the low man on drives
Strengths
• One of the best teams in college basketball at making reads and executing out of it.
They have certain things they do within their offense but it is read-based, which requires
smart players, which they definitely have.
• Team full of smart ball movers and cutters. A lot of execution, no one stops the flow.
• Really good spacing overall. A lot of 5-out, and when Brajkovic is posting up they do a
great job of spacing the floor
• Really high-level 3-point shooting team. They have multiple great shooters with Lee,
Jones, and Loyer
• They do an impressive job of keeping the ball out of the paint with their scheme. They
have enough size to protect the rim decently well when teams get there.
• Really good at running spread ball screens. They space the floor well, finish at the rim,
and can shoot off the dribble.
• Excellent use of false motion on the weakside during sets
• They generate a lot of easy looks at the rim out of their offense
• Really good in transition at getting to the deep corners and having a rim runner
• They have decent size at most spots
Weaknesses
• They have a major lack of self-created paint touches and playmaking. Everything
happens within the offense.
• They are not a very athletic team at all. They don’t really have any plus athletes.
• They are really poor in pick and roll coverages. They play at the level but don’t have
good personnel to get over the screen, tag, or recover.
• Point of attack defense is not very good at almost every spot on the perimeter
• They have to bring help on post ups, which opens up a lot on the perimeter
• They don’t use the bench very much. The players off the bench don’t fit as well.
• They give up a ton of shots from 3
• They don’t go after offensive rebounds
Evaluation
Davidson is yet another team that is really good on one end of the floor and really poor on the other
end. They run a beautiful offense, and McKillop recruits’ specific players that can fit within his system on
that end. However, the players that fit really well within the offense also happen to not be very good on
the other side of the ball. It’s fairly remarkable that Davidson is where they are defensively in the
rankings considering their personnel on that end. Davidson runs a motion-based read heavy offense that
does an excellent job of spacing the floor. They can flow into a lot of different actions, but whatever
they do it can seamlessly flow into a secondary and tertiary action. They space the floor really well with
shooting and have three players that can run off of screens and hit shots at an elite level. Brajkovic also
opens up more options with his ability to post up and pass. They pick apart conventional coverages with
false motion off the ball to distract the weakside from the main action. They are fascinating to study.
Defensively, they very aggressively try to take away drives. They actually do a solid job at this. They just
have such poor point of attack defenders it doesn’t matter. They are constantly plugging holes that are
created by a blow by. No matter what your scheme is, if you can’t contain the ball, you won’t have a
good defense. They also really struggle to defend in pick and roll or in the post. Offensively, they can
struggle to create shots for themselves against some bigger teams that can switch more. This is a really
good offensive team with a really bad defense. They might win a game with the right matchup but
getting beyond that will be very dependent on shooting luck for me.
9.44. Providence
Depth Chart
Coach: Ed Cooley
PG: Al Durham | Guard | 6’4” B1: Jared Bynum | Guard | 5’10”
SG: A.J. Reeves | Wing | 6’6” B2: Alyn Breed | Guard | 6’3”
SF: Justin Minaya | Forward | 6’6” B3: Ed Croswell | Forward | 6’8”
PF: Noah Horchler | Forward | 6’8” B4: Brycen Goodine | Guard | 6’4”
C: Nate Watson | Big | 6’10” B5: Cesare Edwards | Big | 6’9”
Player Stats

• Nate Watson: Run a lot of offense through Watson, really strong player with solid footwork in the
post. Really good at using his strength to create angles and seals. Not a great passer. Non-shooter and
bad at the line. Doesn’t move his feet well on the perimeter.
• Jared Bynum: Talented offensive player, has become a really good shot-maker and quick enough to
generate shots at the rim. Can run pick and roll. Undersized for position.
• Justin Minaya: Best defensive player on the team by far. Versatile enough to guard 1-4. One of the
better perimeter defenders in the country. Small offensive role, decent shooter in spot ups.
• Al Durham: Puts pressure on the rim and gets to the line a lot. Capable shooter, although very
inconsistent. Solid point of attack defender.
• A.J. Reeves: Movement shooter with an inconsistent shot. Mostly just used as a 3 and D option. Solid
athlete and strong frame.
• Noah Horchler: Good shooter and rebounder. Spaces the floor and causes some matchup issues with
the shooting at his size. Really poor defender, attacked often on the perimeter.
• Alyn Breed: Very limited offensive role. Doesn’t shoot the ball well. Good defensive player with size
and length.
• Ed Croswell: Role player as a center, grabs rebounds and protects the rim. Doesn’t have great size for
what he’s asked to do.
Scheme
• Good amount of flex offensively, will also run a good amount of other sets
• Can mix in a good amount of 2-3 or a zone press
• Can switch, play at the level, or hard show on ball screens
Strengths
• They can generate looks at the rim in a lot of different ways. Off the dribble, off post
ups, or off cuts. They play a lot through Watson in the middle, but Bynum and Durham
can provide rim pressure from the perimeter.
• Guards do a really good job of generating free throws. Can attack the rim off the
dribble well. Big men also draw a lot of fouls.
• Good at the point of attack defensively. Minaya guards the biggest threat, and the
other guards do a good job.
• They are good at attacking smaller teams in the post. They do a good job of placing
shooters around Watson.
• Solid shooting team. Can be a little streaky but have players that can make tough shots
in Bynum, Horchler, and Reeves.
• They are solid at running pick and roll with different players. Can flow into different
stuff out of it.
• They do a good job of defending in the post with Watson’s strength and timely digs
• They do a good job of getting out in transition and creating offense
Weaknesses
• There is a real lack of playmaking with their guards
• Really bad at defending in the pick and roll, difficult to find coverages that work with
Watson’s limitations
• They give up a lot of shots around the rim defensively. Horchler and Watson can really
be attacked on the perimeter.
• Watson is not as good against opponents that can match his strength, and when that
happens their offense can be limited
• This team is not very athletic as a whole, and can struggle with more athletic
opponents
• They have a lack of depth, players off the bench outside of Bynum are not very good
• They generate very few turnovers defensively
• Transition defense is really poor
Evaluation
The evaluation of Providence is like a classic case of nerds vs. jocks. Some people love Providence. They
will often point to their record in close games, citing “mental toughness” and excellent coaching as to
why they have such a good record. Some people are lower on Providence. They will tell you close game
record is more based on luck and winning a game by 1 vs. losing a game by 1 does not make a big
difference in overall team evaluation. I am the part of the latter. Providence is a great story and are a
fun team. I just don’t think the late game stuff is predictive of future success. The analytical models think
Providence is good but not that good, and I agree. They don’t have great playmakers, play through a
center that doesn’t have great size and can be limited by strong opponents, their interior defense is
poor, and their pick and roll coverage is bad. They are still a good team. Their guards are solid individual
shot creators, Watson does really well in most matchups, they have good point of attack defenders, and
they have some good shooters. With the right matchups, they can definitely win a game or two in the
tournament. I just struggle to see upside here. The lack of playmaking for others combined with the
poor defense on the interior and in pick and rolls is a tough combination to scale from. I also think
Watson can be neutralized by stronger players, which leads their offense to struggle a little. Matchups
and shooting luck are very important for them, but I just don’t really see it.
9.45. Creighton
Depth Chart
Coach: Greg McDermott
PG: Trey Alexander | Guard | 6’4” B1: Rati Andronikashvili | Guard | 6’4”
SG: Alex O’Connell | Guard | 6’6” B2: KeyShawn Feazell | Forward | 6’9”
SF: Ryan Hawkins | Forward | 6’7” B3: John Christofilis | Guard | 6’3”
PF: Arthur Kaluma | Forward | 6’7” B4: Modestas Kancleris | Forward | 6’9”
C: Ryan Kalkbrenner | Big | 7’0” B5: Devin Davis | Guard | 6’0”
Player Stats

• Ryan Hawkins: Best offensive player on the team, really underrated scorer. Can really shoot the ball.
Has deep range on the shot. Is used to pop ball screens and can also post up. Has good enough size to
not get hurt defensively, but not great on that end.
• Ryan Kalkbrenner: Big center who is a very good defender. High-level rim protector, great using his
length and positioning. Good post player. Good as a roller. Greta offensive rebounder. Not a very good
passer out of the post. Not the most mobile.
• Arthur Kaluma: Athletic forward that can really defend. Very versatile defender. Can also block some
shots. Not too much of an offensive threat outside of finishing. Can hit some shots but is inconsistent.
• Alex O’Connell: Very good shooter, used to come off a lot of screens looking to shoot. Can attack
some closeouts. Has some ability to handle the ball. Solid athlete. Solid defender with good positional
size.
• Trey Alexander: More of a 2, but turned point guard with the Nembhard injury. Can hit some tough
shots. Can make some plays. Good athlete. Good defender on the perimeter.
• Rati Andronikashvili: Backup guard. Good passer, can handle the ball. Not much of a threat to score.
Really good defender at the point of attack.
• KeyShawn Feazell: Plays center off the bench. Good motor, has good size, strong frame. Not as much
of a rim protector, but a little more versatile defensively.
Scheme
• Generally a more set-based offense with a ton of movement and double screens. Very
ball screen heavy.
• Drop coverage with Kalkbrenner, can also play him at the level
• Can switch 1-4
• Will stunt on drives from one pass away, pack line
Strengths
• Excellent rim protecting team. They have good overall size and Kalkbrenner is a great
rim protector. They are comfortable funneling ball handlers towards him.
• Elite pick and roll defense. Mostly play drop with Kalkbrenner, who’s massive.
• Really good player and ball movement team. Great understanding of how to use the
space on the floor with empty sides and manipulating the tag. Allows for cuts and slips.
• They play with a lot of size. 2-5 are all 6’6” or taller. Allows them to switch some.
• They run some really good screening actions. McDermott is one of the better coaches
with set design.
• They will not give opponents good looks from 3. Coverages on and off the ball are
adjusted radically when playing against shooters.
• Really good at defending without fouling. Starts with Kalkbrenner on the interior but
the perimeter players also do a really good job.
• Kalkbrenner is a very good defender in the post
Weaknesses
• They have absolutely zero depth. They only play 7 players.
• Alexander has done an admirable job but is just not a primary lead guard. With the
Nembhard injury this team has poor point guard play.
• Perimeter shot creation is an issue. No real shot creators on the team I’d be
comfortable with. They struggle to get to the paint off the dribble.
• They do not have enough shooters for their style of play, I’ only really be worried
about Hawkins and O’Connell
• They are really lacking someone that can come off a ball screen and score. They run
really good actions but that have that dimension to make them more effective.
• They turn the ball over at a high rate
• Conservative defensive scheme rarely forces turnovers
• They can’t get out in transition because of lack of depth
• They allow a lot of shots inside the paint with their scheme
• Overall point of attack defense leaves a little to be desired at some spots
Evaluation
Creighton has been a sneakily good team this season, but the injury to Ryan Nembhard really hurts their
chances of winning in the tournament. Nembhard was their primary ball handler, initiating their actions
and making really good reads consistently. Without him, Trey Alexander has taken on that role, but he is
much more of a 2 with some ability to handle. Alexander has done a solid job, but he is not up to the
level as Nembhard. The offense for Creighton has not been great. They run really good stuff, but
struggle to generate efficient offense with their personnel. They are lacking someone that can
consistently put pressure on the rim from the perimeter. Hawkins is a very good shooter but doesn’t
create for himself as much. Kalkbrenner is a good post player but not a great passer out of it. They also
play too many non-shooters for their style. Defensively they have been really good. They prevent 3s and
Kalkbrenner defends the rim really well. Kaluma gives them some versatility, and their overall size is
difficult to deal with. They have some weaknesses at the point of attack and allow too many shots at the
rim, but the defense is what will need to lead to a win if they get one in the tournament. It’s hard for me
to see the upside with this team. They will need the right matchup and some luck in round one.
9.46. Notre Dame
Depth Chart
Coach: Mike Brey
PG: Prentiss Hubb | Guard | 6’3” B1: Cormac Ryan | Guard | 6’5”
SG: Blake Wesley | Wing | 6’5” B2: Trey Wertz | Guard | 6’5”
SF: Dane Goodwin | Wing | 6’6” B3: Elijah Taylor | Forward | 6’8”
PF: Paul Atkinson | Forward | 6’10” B4: J.R. Konieczny | Guard | 6’6”
C: Nate Laszewski | Big | 6’10” B5: Tony Sanders | Guard | 6’7”
Player Stats

• Blake Wesley: Athletic wing that uses the most possessions on the team. Can get to the paint well and
is good in ball screens. Shoots a high volume of 3s and is inconsistent. Best individual shot creator. Good
defender with his length and athleticism.
• Dane Goodwin: Really good shooter. Has range and shoots off movement. Attacks closeouts well.
Comes off a lot of off ball screens. Fits really well within the offense. Not a great defensive player, not
the best individual shot creator.
• Prentiss Hubb: Best playmaker on the team, can get into the paint and attack closeouts within their
offense. Solid shooter but shots haven’t fallen as much this season. Quick and has a good handle. Decent
defender.
• Nate Laszewski: Stretch 5 that starts at the 4. Plays backup center when Atkinson isn’t in. Really good
shooter, can’t leave him open. Used to pop on ball screens. Not a very good athlete, is not good
defensively. Doesn’t create shots for himself.
• Paul Atkinson: Starts at the 5 and is undersized. Really good in the post. Finishes at the rim at a high
clip. Not a very good athlete. Not much of a rim protector.
• Cormac Ryan: Very good movement shooter. Moves well off the ball, comes off a lot of screens. Good
ball mover. Strong player, solid defensively.
• Trey Wertz: Used more off the ball, solid cutter and can hit open shots. Good defensive player. Plus
athlete with solid positional size.
Scheme
• They run a motion offense that can go either 5 out or 4 out, a lot of off ball screens
and different reads
• Ice side ball screens, play at the level of middle ball screens
• Dig from one pass away on drives but will lightly deny from one pass away
Strengths
• One of the better teams in the country at utilizing off-ball screens to generate offense
• A lot of designs are for shooters to come off screens, they space the floor well and are
a good shooting team. Really good cutting team.
• Guards do a really good job of keeping the ball moving without turning it over
• They run a ton of pick and roll or pop and do an excellent job of hitting open shooters
for catch and shoot looks
• Really good ball and player movement team. Players excel off the ball.
• They often go to 5 out looks with a center in Laszewski that is a really good shooter
• Atkinson is really good in the post, spacing is also excellent around him
• They do a good job within their defensive scheme of generally keeping opponents
away from the rim
• They don’t commit many fouls at all defensively
• They don’t allow anything for opponents in transition
• Good defensive rebounding team
• They are good at keeping side ball screens away from the middle
Weaknesses
• Poor rim protection team. They don’t have any real shot blockers, and both of their
centers are undersized and are not traditional big men.
• Point of attack defense is subpar at certain spots. They can be attacked, especially
against teams that really move the ball well.
• Really poor at defending in the post, Atkinson especially can be attacked there
• Self-generation of offense is lacking. They can struggle to get paint touches. Outside of
Hubb and Wesley, no one is really creating outside of their motion offense.
• They only play 7 players, really have no depth
• They don’t go after offensive rebounds to get back in transition
• Don’t force very many turnovers within their conservative defensive scheme
Evaluation
Notre Dame is a good basketball team with a really good coach, but have had inconsistent results
throughout the season. They run a very aesthetically pleasing motion offense that looks even better
when Laszewski is at the 5,allowing them to go 5-out. The 4-out is still really effective because the post
threat of Atkinson. Within the Notre Dame offense, there is a ton of off-ball movement, off-ball screens,
and a heavy dosage of on-ball screens. They have players that are good at each different aspect of the
offense. Goodwin and Ryan excel off the ball. Wesley and Hubb are good on the ball. Laszewski and
Atkinson have nice roles as big men within the offense. While they have a very good-looking offense, it
is functionally a good offense that isn’t great. They don’t have that elite player that can put them over
the top. Motion can lead to nowhere if teams defend really well, and the players don’t punish the
defense once the offense breaks down. There is a general lack of high-level self-creation that holds
Notre Dame back from being elite offensively. Defensively, they are much weaker. They don’t play with
a center that can protect the rim. They are generally undersized and not very athletic. They have
personnel limitations that makes it very difficult to have a good defense. They struggle with teams that
can either space the floor, run a lot of middle ball screens, or have players that can generate paint
touches. Notre Dame can win a game in the tournament with the right matchup and are good enough at
shooting that they can get lucky. I don’t think there is much upside here beyond that.
9.47. Wyoming
Depth Chart
Coach: Jeff Linder
PG: Xavier DuSell | Guard | 6’4” B1: Brendan Wenzel | Wing | 6’7”
SG: Drake Jeffries | Guard | 6’5” B2: Hunter Thompson | Forward | 6’10”
SF: Hunter Maldonado | Wing | 6’7” B3: Noah Reynolds | Guard | 6’3”
PF: Jeremiah Oden | Forward | 6’8” B4: Kenny Foster | Guard | 6’5”
C: Graham Ike | Big | 6’9” B5: Deng Dut | Guard | 6’4”
Player Stats

• Graham Ike: Highest usage player in the country. Has good footwork and is a good athlete. A little
undersized but can use that to dribble into post ups. Uses his frame well in the post to score in unique
ways. Really good passer. Solid defender, but not great.
• Hunter Maldonado: Must be the highest usage wing in the post. Dribbles into a ton of post ups. Really
good at punishing smaller players in there. Very good passer. Will initiate a lot of offense as a big point
guard. Good wing defender. Not a great shooter.
• Drake Jeffries: Really high-level shooter. Hard to help off of him. He can space the floor from multiple
feet behind the arc. Solid defensively as well.
• Xavier DuSell: Solid shooter, confident on the shot. Definitely fits within the offensive system. Can also
run some pick and roll. Solid defender at the point of attack.
• Jeremiah Oden: Defensive minded forward who can also space the floor. Also used in the pick and roll
as the roller. Best rim protector on the team. Good athlete.
• Brendan Wenzel: Wing with good size, can spot up and hit jumpers. Can also handle the ball a little in
pick and roll. Solid defensively on the wing.
• Hunter Thompson: Bigger forward who is also capable of shooting spot ups. Plays backup center in a
limited capacity.
• Noah Reynolds: Backup guard, fairly limited offensive role. Will run some pick and roll and can spot
up. Limited in minutes.
Scheme
• They post up more than any team in the country by far
• Drop coverage against ball screens
• Play a pack line with more conservative help from one pass away
Strengths
• They run a ton of stuff to get Maldonado and Ike in the post with capable shooters
surrounding them. They are really good at forcing mismatches and attacking, as well as
passing out of the post.
• Spacing is really good on post touches, and guards can do a good job of attacking
closeouts
• Really good at pick and roll once they get into it, multiple guards can handle the ball
and Ike can be used in different ways as the roller
• They use their length to do a really good job of contesting shots. They will not help too
hard from one pass away to be able to contest shots on kickouts.
• They are very good at finishing inside of the paint. You can’t let Maldonado or Ike get
too deep or it’s over.
• Great at defending in the post. Will often double better threats and do a good job of
rotating.
• They generate a ton of free throws because of how they play
• They are a fairly big team. They will punish opponents without a lot of size.
Weaknesses
• You can neutralize their offense if you have players to defend Ike and Maldonado one
on one in the post
• They are very reliant on post ups to generate their best offense, and it works best if
other teams have to bring doubles
• I wish they were a better shooting team for their style of play. A lot of their perimeter
players are good shooters but not high-level.
• They are not very good at defending in pick and roll
• Point of attack defense can be lackluster at times
• They don’t force a lot of turnovers defensively and rarely get out in transition as a
result
• Rarely go for offensive rebounds
• Not a lot of depth, starters play a ton of minutes
• They struggle with teams that can match their size
• They are not good at defending in transition
Evaluation
Jeff Linder should be in National Coach of the Year discussions for what he has done with this team.
They are the most unique team in the country with how they play, accumulating more post ups than
anyone, and only doing it with two players (one of whom is a guard): Hunter Maldonado and Graham
Ike. They do a great job of using screens to get certain matchups or having them dribble into post ups.
They have great space when the ball is in the post with competent shooters around them. If teams can’t
guard the players one on one in the post, Wyoming has a field day of ball movement to find open
shooters and cutters. Both post players are excellent at finding the open man out of the post, but they
also excel at scoring one on one. The issue with the offense is that if a team can stop Ike and Maldonado
one on one, they really struggle. They struggle with bigger and longer teams in general with their style of
play. I wish they were better at shooting the 3. On defense, they have not done a great job. They try to
prevent shots at the rim without a ton of success. Wyoming has good size and decent athletes, but just
are not great as a whole defensively. This is one of the more matchup dependent teams in the
tournament. I can’t see them advancing to the second weekend without getting very favorable
matchups or shooting the lights out.
9.48. Iowa State
Depth Chart
Coach: T.J. Otzelberger
PG: Tyrese Hunter | Guard | 6’0” B1: Caleb Grill | Guard | 6’3”
SG: Izaiah Brockington | Guard | 6’4” B2: Aljaz Kunc | Forward | 6’8”
SF: Gabe Kalscheur | Wing | 6’4” B3: Tre Jackson | Guard | 6’1”
PF: Tristan Enaruna | Forward | 6’8” B4: Robert Jones | Big | 6’10”
C: George Conditt IV | Forward | 6’10” B5: Jaden Walker | Guard | 6’5”
Player Stats

• Izaiah Brockington: Talented scorer in the midrange, good athlete, solid handle. Can create shots.
Good point of attack defender. Very good athlete. Passing is rough and takes bad shots.
• Tyrese Hunter: Really good point of attack defender, strong and athletic at his size. Good ball handler
and passer, not enough of a scoring threat.
• Gabe Kalscheur: Good shooter who’s struggling to shoot it right now. Solid frame for a wing, useful
defensively. Can also attack closeouts. Not good with creation.
• George Conditt IV: Athletic big who can catch lobs and does some stuff from the elbow. Good lateral
movement skills and can protect the rim. Not much of a scoring threat.
• Tristan Enaruna: Solid athlete, isn’t tasked with much on offense. Good help defender defensively and
can guard out on the perimeter.
• Caleb Grill: Good shooter, also capable of attacking closeouts. Doesn’t do a ton off movement. Doesn’t
create for himself. Passable defensively.
• Aljaz Kunc: Capable stretch option to spot up, doesn’t provide much else offensively. Has solid size but
doesn’t have the best movement skills defensively, average athlete.
• Tre Jackson: Energy guard off the bench, can generate some offense with shooter and a little pick and
roll. Strong frame, tough at the point of attack.
• Rob Jones: Utility center that can do some rim protection, rebounding, and protect the rim. More of a
traditional big than the other big men.
Scheme
• Very heavy no middle defense
• Transition heavy team on offense
• Mostly will play at the level of ball screens, ice side ball screens
Strengths
• One of the best teams in the country at preventing opponent paint touches. Big men
fit really well within the system in this regard.
• Very connected as a group on defense, do a really good job of being in help positions
early. Great communicating team, they rotate well.
• Have a dynamic guard duo in Brockington and Hunter that can both create shots
• Force opponents into taking a ton of midrange jumpers by preventing shots at the rim
and getting out to the 3-point line with relatively quick closeouts
• Big men are mobile and can fly over to contest shots at the rim
• Guards are strong enough at the point of attack to execute the scheme
• They force a lot of turnovers, which could also help lead to easier offense
• Really good pick and roll defense
• Defend in the post well, they have well timed help or doubles
Weaknesses
• Complete lack of any kind of offensive talent, Brockington is not good enough to be a
number one option and everything else is lackluster
• Outside shooting has been an issue for this team, Kalscheur can’t seem to hit shots
and the other players don’t have a track record
• Major lack of plus playmaking outside of Hunter, no one else can really run a pick and
roll to get it to the athletic big men
• Very few self-generated paint touches, can’t get to the line because of it
• Turn the ball over a lot because offense leads to nowhere
• If the initial action doesn’t generate a shot, they have a very tough time offensively
• Very high foul team
• Not very much size at all, especially on the perimeter
Evaluation
T.J. Otzelberger deserves a ton of credit for this team making the tournament. Iowa State was ranked
outside the top-100 to begin the season in KenPom as they are not an overly talented group. Their
aggressive no middle defense has completely turned this team into someone that can at least have a
fighting chance against much better opponents. They have really good guards at the point of attack,
especially Hunter. The big men are fairly mobile and do a good job in help positions. Everyone has
bought in and executes the scheme really well. I do have some concerns with their size within the
scheme. More successful teams are just bigger than they are, and they have very little room for error
with their personnel. They can also just be hurt more by bigger initiators or teams that move the ball
around really well. Offensively is what holds this team back from making it to the second weekend in all
likelihood for me. They really struggle to generate anything on that end of the floor with a complete lack
of offensive talent. Their best offensive player is Brockington, who lives on mostly tough shots from the
midrange. Hunter can run some ball screens and they run some good offensive actions, but they just
don’t have good personnel. The shooting is also poor. The players that are theoretically shooters have
struggled to hit shots this season. The big men can’t do as much as they are asked. Brockington can’t
make plays and Hunter isn’t a great on-ball initiator yet. This is a really fun story and solid group, but the
defense is not great enough to counter how subpar the offense is. The defense also just hasn’t been as
good against better opponents, meaning scaling up to the NCAA Tournament will be a challenge. I would
be surprised if this team won more than one game, and I would not favor them in most matchups in the
first round.
10.49. South Dakota State
Depth Chart
Coach: Eric Henderson
PG: Charlie Easley | Guard | 6’2” B1: Luke Appel | Big | 6’8”
SG: Alex Adrians | Guard | 6’4” B2: Matthew Mims | Guard | 6’0”
SF: Zeke Mayo | Guard | 6’3” B3: Matt Dentlinger | Big | 6’8”
PF: Baylor Scheierman | Forward | 6’6” B4: Noah Freidel | Guard | 6’4”
C: Douglas Wilson | Big | 6’7” B5: David Wingett | Wing | 6’7”
Player Stats

• Baylor Scheierman: Unreal shooter. Has crazy range on the shot, lethal coming off screens. Can hit
tough shots in the lane as well, uses shooting gravity to generate his own looks. He is very limited
athletically and can’t really create his own looks form deep. Gets hunted defensively.
• Douglas Wilson: Very non-traditional big man. Center in the body of a wing. Good athlete and skilled
in the post. Good finisher and uses his quickness advantage well. Versatile defender. Undersized for the
position and not a great passer.
• Zeke Mayo: Really talented Freshman. Can handle the ball and really shoot it. Has some shot creation
ability and a tough shot maker. Good athlete. Best perimeter defender on the team.
• Luke Appel: Skilled big man off the bench. Works well as a scorer out of the post. Will really hurt
backup centers. Undersized for the position and not a great athlete.
• Alex Adrians: Plays more of a secondary role within the offense. Absolutely lethal shooter in catch and
shoot situations. Can handle the ball and make some passing reads. Decent positional size but limited
athlete.
• Charlie Easley: Another great shooter for this team. Will bring the ball up the court and initiate some
offense. Can handle the ball in pick and roll, but most dangerous off the ball. Undersized and not very
athletic.
• Matt Dentlinger: Skilled big man that has had a more limited role as the season has gone on. Can work
out of the post well.
• Matthew Mims: Smaller shooter off the bench. Very limited in his offensive role.
Scheme
• Spread the floor with 4 out or 5 out and attack in space out of the post or in ball
screen actions
• Will show on the pick and roll, but not very hard
• More of a pack line defense with where they direct the ball
• They play fast in transition and in the half court
Strengths
• They are the best shooting team from 3 in terms of percentage and it’s not even close.
They have 5 of their 8 rotation players shooting at an unreal level on good volume.
• They are good at using their shooting gravity to get other stuff. They can attack
closeouts to generate paint touches. They also use it to space the floor around the post.
• They have 2 players who have been really good in the post in Wilson and Appel. Both
really benefit from the system and spacing.
• They are organized and ridiculous in transition. That is a large part of their offense,
and they really get wide to capitalize on having shooters.
• Wildly efficient in pick and roll. Everyone that uses screens is a threat to shoot it off
the dribble but there are also few places to help, making defensive coverages really
difficult to scheme.
• Very good cutting team, they use shooting gravity to create cutting angles
• They understand exactly what they are trying to get offensively. The shots don’t feel
forced, which is how they can keep their percentages so high.
Weaknesses
• They are going to be at a wild athleticism deficit in almost any game they play against
high-major competition
• They can’t contain the ball at the point of attack defensively at all. There are a lot of
players who can really be picked on, Scheierman is the biggest victim.
• They are very undersized in the interior. Their centers are not great rim protectors,
especially if you ask them to scale up to better competition.
• They will give a lot of 3s to their opponents because they need to help so much
• Pick and roll defense can get picked apart, they do not do a good job of containing the
ball handler in their show
• Post defense will be a real issue against better post players
Evaluation
South Dakota State is the type of team I really want to love. They are a ridiculously good shooting team.
They are such an unreal shooting team that they could just be good enough at that one facet of the
game they can get lucky and compete with anyone. South Dakota State has a really high-powered
offense built around the shooting. They use that shooting ability to generate paint touches, post ups,
cuts, and pick and roll usage. They are a ridiculously efficient offense against their level of competition
and a very entertaining group. Baylor Scheierman was the player of the year in the Summit League, and
he is arguably the best shooter in the entire country while standing at 6’6”. I just have serious questions
about how this team scales. They are at a major athleticism deficit compared to the teams they will be
facing in the tournament. They already have a really poor defense, and I struggle to see how they don’t
get absolutely burned on that end in most matchups. They are bad at the point of attack and their
primary rim protectors are 6’7”-6’8”. There’s just nothing to do here from a coaching perspective
besides bring help and hope for misses from 3. Offensively I also worry about how they scale. I don’t see
how their post players can score efficiently against better competition. I think it will be much harder to
generate good looks for them against more size and athleticism. This is a team a lot of people think can
make a run to the second weekend, and I want to be right there with them. They are so good at
shooting they could get lucky. I just really struggle to see it.
10.50. Chattanooga
Depth Chart
Coach: Lamont Paris
PG: Malachi Smith | Guard | 6’4” B1: A.J. Caldwell | Guard | 6’5”
SG: David Jean-Baptiste | Guard | 6’1” B2: Grant Ledford | Guard | 6’5”
SF: Darius Banks | Guard | 6’6” B3: Josh Ayeni | Big | 6’7”
PF: KC Hankton | Forward | 6’7” B4: Avery Diggs | Big | 6’11”
C: Silvio De Sousa | Big | 6’9” B5: Tada Stricklen | Guard | 6’0”
Player Stats

• Malachi Smith: Very talented 3-level scorer. One of the better guards in the country. Strong frame and
dangerous shot creator. Decent playmaker. What makes him really good is how good he is on defense.
Excellent point of attack defender with the ability to switch onto bigger wings.
• David Jean-Baptiste: Smaller scoring guard. Excellent shooter with gravity off the dribble. Can get into
the paint as well. Not used much as a playmaker. Good point of attack defender, strong frame and play
much larger than his height.
• Silvio De Sousa: Kansas transfer and former high 4 star recruit. Big, physical, and athletic center.
Moves his feet well on the perimeter defensively while also giving some rim protection. Solid post player
and can attack smaller matchups. Good rebounder.
• Darius Banks: Good athlete, slashing wing that is a bit of an inconsistent shooter. Good finisher and
draws fouls. Can also work a little in the post. Guards the ball well defensively.
• KC Hankton: Starts but doesn’t play a ton of minutes. Limited offensive role but can post smaller
players well. Has some size and strength, fits well into their defensive scheme. Not a great athlete.
• A.J. Caldwell: Shooter off the bench. Not a bad passer for his role. Mostly used to spot up. Not a great
athlete, feet can be a little slow on the perimeter but he has solid size.
• Grant Ledford: Shooter off the bench with decent size. Hasn’t shot the ball great for his role.
• Josh Ayeni: Will play backup center. Strong and physical frame, plays with a high motor. Limited in role
to rebounding and playing defense.
• Avery Diggs: Another center that comes off the bench. Solid post player, has good size and skill. Tallest
big of the bunch, limits his versatility but allows for more traditional big man stuff. Not a great athlete.
Scheme
• Versatile ball screen coverages. Can play at the level, but will mix in switching,
blitzes, and drop coverage.
• Will play aggressive and physical at the point of attack defensively
• They will not bring a ton of help from one pass away on drives, trust their defenders
• Can do a lot of switching. Will look to late switch a ton.
• 4 out and 3 out looks on offense, will mostly run through sets
Strengths
• They have dynamic backcourt in Smith and Jean-Baptiste. Both are capable of creating
offense off the dribble from the perimeter, underrated duo.
• Smith is a tough matchup for a lot of teams because of his size and skill level for a
guard, can score at 3-levels. You need a bigger defender to guard him.
• Strong point of attack defense. They will really get physical and do a good job of
staying in front of the ball.
• They have some very good shooting threats from the perimeter, with Jean-Baptiste
and Smith being the most lethal weapons from out there
• Very effective in transition when they run
• The guards do a good job in ball screens coming off looking to score
• They look to hunt mismatches all over the court, efficient post up team
• They have a good amount of size and strength for a mid-major in their rotation
• Good offensive rebounding team led by De Sousa in that regard
• They have defensive versatility with different coverages they can play
Weaknesses
• Offense can get stagnant with guards taking turns trying to attack one on one or with
looking into the post
• Creation for others is questionable. They have some good individual scorers, but they
don’t necessarily always create looks for others.
• They use their physicality and size to their advantage but I’m not sure how scalable
that is against high-major teams
• Spacing is not always great, they often play with a couple of limited shooters
• Their defensive scheme can allow for some shots at the rim
• They can struggle to contain the ball handler in pick and roll at times, I question their
pick and roll defense overall when De Sousa is not involved
• I’m not sure if their post players would have as much success against post defenders
that can match their physicality
Evaluation
Chattanooga is a popular low-seeded team that people think can be a dark horse to make the second
weekend. The sales pitch for them is a mid-major with an elite guard in Malachi Smith, another really
good guard in David Jean-Baptiste, decent size, and defensive versatility. I understand part of the appeal
with this team, but I have questions about how they scale against better teams. The SoCon plays in a
specific way for the most part, and Chattanooga has a roster that is just bigger and more physical than
the other teams in the conference. That won’t be the case against the programs they will be playing in
the tournament. I’m not sure how their inside-out style of play scales to the tournament. I think Smith
and Jean-Baptiste can still create advantages, but they are less effective against bigger defenders at the
point of attack. I like the defensive versatility, but their physicality and size won’t be as much of an issue
for better teams to handle. They may be able to compete in a game against a team with weaker guard
play, but I’m just not there in seeing them as a team that can realistically make the second weekend
without outlier luck. They are certainly a good mid-major and very deserving of the bid and seed they
have, but I don’t think the size and athleticism will have the same impact in the tournament.
10.51. Montana State
Depth Chart
Coach: Danny Sprinkle
PG: Xavier Bishop | Guard | 5’8” B1: Raequan Battle | Wing | 6’5”
SG: Amin Adamu | Guard | 6’5” B2: Great Osobor | Forward | 6’8”
SF: Abdul Mohamed | Forward | 6’7” B3: Nick Gazelas | Guard | 6’4”
PF: Tyler Patterson | Forward | 6’8” B4: Sam Lecholat | Forward | 6’7”
C: Jubrile Belo | Forward | 6’9” B5: Kellan Tynes | Guard | 6’3”
Player Stats

• Jubrile Belo: Very good player on both ends. Has a lot of size and can move decently well for his
frame. Good rim protector. Really good rebounder. Good post player.
• Xavier Bishop: Small guard with elite quickness. Very difficult to contain at the point of attack. Three-
level scorer, really good shooter off the dribble. Very good playmaker. Can struggle defensively at his
size.
• Amin Adamu: Very good two-way player. Really good defensively with his length, can guard multiple
spots. Solid shooter and has some ability to pull up in the midrange. Can also get to the rim. Not much of
a playmaker.
• Abdul Mohamed: Great role player. Has size and length, very good defender with versatility. Can make
catch and shoot 3s, also capable of attacking closeouts or finishing on the interior. Really good
rebounder.
• Raequan Battle: Really good player off the bench. Three-level scorer, can create shots off the dribble.
Can force the issue a little at times. Good athlete and solid handle. Also a good wing defender with the
ability to guard down positionally.
• Tyler Patterson: Big shooter. Is not asked to do a lot offensively besides cut and shoot 3s. Really good
in his role at his size. Not a bad defender because of the size and length.
• Great Osobor: Big Freshman off the bench, plays backup center. Has a huge frame, really strong and
has a high motor. Good post player as well. Very good rebounder.
• Nick Gazelas: Shooter off the bench. Hits tough shots, can also attack closeouts. Doesn’t play a ton of
minutes but is not afraid to shoot. Decent size and not a bad athlete.
Scheme
• Wil play drop coverage with their big men, can also ice side ball screens
• Deny from one pass away
• Can go 4 out and 3 out, will play through sets
Strengths
• They have multiple players that can really create shots and make tough ones in Bishop,
Adamu, and Battle. They can create their own shots but are also really good out of ball
screens.
• They have a lot of size for a mid-major
• They make life difficult for opponents offensively with their length and point of attack
defense, they force opponents to play more in isolation
• They are very good at protecting the rim. Belo is a good primary rim protector, but
they also have good secondary rim protectors
• They draw a lot of fouls with the combination of their big men and the perimeter
players that can score around the rim
• They have good shooters on the perimeter in Patterson and Gazelas, with other
players that will space the floor as well
• They have some defensive versatility with the size and general athleticism at multiple
spots
• They score well in the post with Belo and Osobor, they have good space around them
• They do a good job in their drop coverage and ice coverage against ball screens
• Very good defensive rebounding team
Weaknesses
• They are a very high foul team with their defensive style
• Their size will not be as much as an advantage against high-major teams
• At times, they can be reliant on tougher shots. Sometimes the ball doesn’t move well
and the perimeter players will force the issue.
• They can be a little careless with the ball
• They are a good rim protecting team but will funnel a lot to the rim, allowing a decent
number of shots there
• They should be able to get to the rim more than they do offensively
• They have some players that will be attacked defensively, especially Bishop
• Defending elite players in the post could be an issue for them
• This is not the quickest team
Evaluation
After winning the Big Sky tournament, Montana State enters the NCAA Tournament as a very interesting
lower seeded team. They have the elements to pull off a round 1 upset. They have a good amount of
size up and down the lineup. Defensively, they have good rim protectors, size, and versatility. They are
also solid athletically and have elite defenders on the perimeter and interior. Offensively, they have
three really good shot creators around multiple good post players. They also have some good shooting
specialists. This is a legit team. It will be interesting to see how they scale. Size and athleticism is a big
advantage for them in the Big Sky, but that obviously won’t be the case in the tournament. Will they be
able to scale on both ends of the floor? I think they can. My concerns start with their offense. They can
be a little reliant on creating and making tougher looks. I’m also a little concerned about post ups being
less effective against better competition. Defensively, I’m concerned about how much they give up
around the rim. Overall, this is one of the better lower seeded teams to me. They have the pieces to pull
off an upset, but they will need some decent shooting luck to do so. This is a dangerous team.
10.52. Richmond
Depth Chart
Coach: Chris Mooney
PG: Jacob Gilyard | Gurad | 5’9” B1: Isaiah Wilson | Guard | 6’0”
SG: Andre Gustavson | Guard | 6’4” B2: Nick Sherod | Guard | 6’4”
SF: Tyler Burton | Wing | 6’7” B3: Matt Grace | Forward | 6’9”
PF: Nathan Cayo | Forward | 6’7” B4: Dji Bailey | Guard | 6’5”
C: Grant Golden | Big | 6’10” B5: Connor Crabtree | Guard | 6’6”
Player Stats

• Tyler Burton: Athletic wing with a lot of length. Good slasher but can also score from beyond the arc.
Will take some pull ups but isn’t very efficient there. Not much of a playmaker. Good defender and
rebounder, has some versatility.
• Jacob Gilyard: Monster in terms of getting steals, very good point of attack defender. Will often guard
the length of the court. Gets through screens really well, but size can limit him on that end at times.
Good ball handler and very good playmaker, good shot maker as well from deep.
• Grant Golden: Starting center that gets a lot of offense run through him. Good player in the post and a
really good passer. Has really good touch and footwork on the interior. Not much of a rim protector or
athlete.
• Nathan Cayo: Good athlete and versatile defender. Not a shooter but is a good cutter and can score
well on smaller players in the post. Really bad free throw shooter.
• Andre Gustavson: Solid spot up shooter that can handle the ball a little. Not too much of an offensive
threat. Good perimeter defender.
• Nick Sherod: Shooter off the bench. Rarely creates inside the arc, but good mover and aggressive
shooter. Strong frame, but not a great defender.
• Isaiah Wilson: Small, skinny guard. Doesn’t create much offense and has been inefficient as a scorer.
Has some length and quickness.
• Matt Grace: Bigger forward off the bench, capable shooter and can put the ball on the deck to some
extent. Can provide some rebounding and secondary rim protection with his size.
Scheme
• Motion offense very heavily inspired by Princeton offense
• More of a pack line defense, will bring strong digs from one pass away
Strengths
• Really good offensive system. Their coach played for one of the more famous
Princeton coaches and they run a heavy amount of that stuff. They are really unselfish
and play with a lot of space combined with player and ball movement.
• They rarely turn the ball over in their system
• Really good overall passing team. Gilyard and Golden are both great passers.
• Great overall cutting team. They cut well on drives and post ups, getting a lot of easy
looks. It also helps the non-shooters be more effective.
• They generate efficient offense out of the post with Golden and Cayo with their
passing and their individual scoring ability down there
• They generate good offense out of ball screens with their spacing, a lot of good empty
side sets
• They do have some dangerous shooters in Gilyard, Burton, and Sherod. They also have
some other players that need to be guarded out there.
• They are good at the point of attack defensively at the 1-4 within their starting lineup
• They do a good job of playing defense without fouling
Weaknesses
• I wish they played with more shooters within their system. They will play more than
one non-shooter at all times, making it easier to help on every action.
• They are not a particularly athletic team overall
• They could be better at generating more looks at the rim off the dribble
• They do not protect the rim very well with Golden as their primary rim protector. He
doesn’t have enough size or length to make up for his lack of verticality.
• Their post actions are not as good without a double, and I’m not sure if their post
players are good enough to draw doubles against better teams
• They are not good at defending in the pick and roll. They can overhelp there, and
Golden is not very good in drop coverage.
• They are really poor at defending in the post
• I’m not sure how much versatility they have on either end
Evaluation
Richmond stole a bid after winning the A10 tourney as the 6th seed. They have underperformed for the
past few seasons, but finally get into the tourney with the likely the last season of their core group. They
have some talent. Offensively, the run a very Princeton heavy style because of who their coach played
for. There is a lot of ball and player movement in a patterned motion offense. They do a good job of
making reads and plays out of it. The fulcrum of the offense is Golden, who can score in the post and is
an excellent passer for a big. Gilyard and Burton can also make a lot of plays out of the offense.
Defensively, they are solid at most spots. Gilyard is a pest at the point of attack, racking up a ridiculous
number of steals. They have some other good defenders on this team as well. The defense is my first
area of concern for this team. I’m worried about Golden as their primary rim protector. He doesn’t do a
great job there, and their pick and roll coverage can be exposed by better teams. Offensively, I wonder
what happens against better teams that don’t need to bring as much help in the post. I also think that
they can be contained fairly well to the perimeter, and they have a few non-shooters that will be helped
off of. I don’t think they can hit enough shots and protect the rim well enough to pull off an upset. The
formula for them would be to play through the post, slow the pace and score off cuts and open shots,
and prevent drives to the rim defensively. They can get some luck and win a game, but that isn’t likely.
10.53. Vermont
Depth Chart
Coach: John Becker
PG: Ben Shungu | Guard | 6’2” B1: Robin Duncan | Guard | 6’5”
SG: Justin Mazzulla | Guard | 6’3” B2: Kameron Gibson | Guard | 6’3”
SF: Finn Sullivan | Guard | 6’4” B3: Aaron Delony | Guard | 6’0”
PF: Isaiah Powell | Forward | 6’6” B4: Nick Fiorillo | Forward | 6’7”
C: Ryan Davis | Forward | 6’8” B5: Bailey Patella | Forward | 6’5”
Player Stats

• Ryan Davis: Starting big man with some versatility. Really good shooter and a great post player. Can
attack some closeouts and a decent passer. Can move decently for a center but is undersized.
• Ben Shungu: Very good offensive player. Shoots the ball really well, can attack off the dribble and get
in the lane. Strong and athletic. Can score well using ball screens. Not a great playmaker. Really good
defender.
• Isaiah Powell: Forward with some versatility on both ends. Can post up smaller players but can also
play on the perimeter. Good passer. Not a great shooter but will take open ones. Solid defender that can
do some switching.
• Justin Mazzulla: Can get to the rim well with the space. Good cutter and passer. Solid defensive player.
Not as much of a shooter.
• Finn Sullivan: Nice 3 and D player. Can switch on defense and has good hands. Really good off the ball
defensively. Can cut and hit some shots, high volume shooter. Can also handle the ball some.
• Aaron Deloney: Good scorer off the bench. Small guard that can hit shots and get to the rim. Quick
player, good within his role. Not much of a playmaker and poor defensively.
• Kameron Gibson: Capable scorer off the bench. Can handle the ball and hit shots from the perimeter.
Doesn’t get a ton of rim pressure and not a great defender or playmaker.
• Robin Duncan: Scores on cuts and can get to the rim. Good passer as well. Isn’t much of a shooter and
not a great defender.
• Nick Fiorillo: Plays backup center, undersized but can shoot and post up. Used more to space the
floor. Can switch out on the perimeter but not a great rim protector.
Scheme
• 5 out motion offense
• Pack line defense, will play heavy in the gaps and bring a lot of help on drives
• Will switch 1-5 and can play drop coverage
Strengths
• Fantastic passing and cutting team. They really operate well within their offensive
system because of it.
• Davis is a matchup issue for some teams. He can shoot, pass, and post up at the center
position. Really good fulcrum for their offense.
• They don’t turn the ball over. Really smart overall team.
• The space allows them to get a lot of great looks at the rim. They can also attack the
paint and find open shooters.
• Very good shooting team. Allows them to operate their 5-out offense with a ton of
space. High volume and high efficiency as a team.
• They do a great job of finishing defensive possessions with rebounds
• They don’t give up a ton of easy looks from behind the arc despite their scheme
• They do a good job of playing defense without fouling
• They utilize post ups well within their offense. Davis is dangerous there and spacing is
always really good with plus cutting.
• They are excellent in scoring out of spread ball screens with shooting off the dribble
and spacing from deep
• Excellent at preventing opponent offense in transition
• They do have some defensive versatility
Weaknesses
• Undersized and not very athletic at most spots. Davis is only 6’8” and is their starting
center, and a few of their rotation players may be overwhelmed by high-major athletes.
• The individual paint touches generated from the perimeter that are not off cuts can be
questionable. They rarely get to the free throw line because of it.
• Conservative defensive scheme doesn’t force any turnovers
• They don’t go for offensive rebounds
• They do not do a very good job of protecting the rim. The lack of size makes them
struggle there; Davis doesn’t protect the rim too well.
• Point of attack defense is subpar at a few spots
• Pick and roll coverage may get exposed against better guards, Davis is not the
prototypical center that can thrive in drop against better teams
Evaluation
Vermont dominated their conference, demolishing everyone in the American East on their way to the
NCAA Tournament. They play a fun style of offense, running beautiful 5 out motion offense that features
a ton of good cutting and passing. They do a fantastic job in their system with a center in Davis that
opens up the floor for them to do so. They have a lot of good shooting overall as well, which opens up
space for cutting and pick and roll play. They are excellent at not turning the ball over as well, and they
play the type of slow pace that can lead to more variability. Defensively, they have some holes. They are
not overly athletic, and they don’t have a real rim protector. Shungu and Powell are nice pieces on that
end, but the other pieces have questions. Davis is undersized and I think he can be attack driving
downhill. Some of their perimeter defenders can get hunted. They do an excellent job of playing in the
gaps, bringing help, and making rotations, which has given them a solid enough defense during the
regular season. I’m not exactly sure how this team scales against the best teams, but they have enough
shooting and run an offensive system that could potentially give a team some issues. The downfall will
be on the defensive end if they can’t pull off the round 1 upset.
10.54. New Mexico State
Depth Chart
Coach: Chris Jans
PG: Sir’Jabari Rice | Guard | 6’4” B1: William McNair | Big | 6’10”
SG: Clayton Henry | Guard | 6’4” B2: Nate Pryor | Guard | 6’4”
SF: Teddy Allen | Wing | 6’6” B3: Mike Peake | Forward | 6’8”
PF: Johnny McCants | Forward | 6’7” B4: Mario McKinney | Guard | 6’2”
C: Yuat Alok | Big | 6’11” B5: Virshon Cotton | Guard | 6’2”
Player Stats

• Teddy Allen: Really high usage player, big scorer. Takes and makes a ton of tough shots at all three
levels. Best when attacking the rim and drawing fouls. Takes a lot of bad shots, not a very good
playmaker. Can shoot his team into or out of games.
• Sir’Jabari Rice: Guard with some size and shot creation ability. Can hit shots from deep, but can also
attack the rim off the dribble. Solid defensive player. Probably the best playmaker on the team, will
initiate a lot of their actions.
• Johnny McCants: Really good two-way role player. Can protect the rim and guard some on the
perimeter. Great defender. Good passer and rebounder. Capable out of the post. Not much of an
athlete.
• Clayton Henry: Lower usage offensive player but has good size and can defend multiple positions. Can
hit open shots from 3. Good athlete.
• Yuat Alok: Big, skinny center that can move his feet some. Doesn’t play a ton of minutes despite
starting but gives them size and versatility. Struggles with the big man stuff, such as rebounding and
finishing.
• Mario McKinney: Smaller guard that’s a really good role player for them. High motor, can make some
plays on the ball. Solid defender on the perimeter. Skinny and small, is also prone to making a lot of
mistakes.
• Nate Pryor: Smaller guard off the bench, doesn’t have much of an offensive role. Not a shooter and
isn’t much of a ball handler. Can defend well at the point of attack.
• Mike Peake: Forward off the bench, capable of shooting and is a good athlete. Works well within their
defense, can provide some secondary rim protection.
Scheme
• Aggressive pack line defense with ball pressure, strong dig in the gaps
• Can also mix in 1-3-1 zone
• Will play offense out of sets, slower overall pace
Strengths
• They have a player in Allen that can erupt for a ton of points in a single game. He takes
and makes a lot of tough shots. Some teams slant their defenses towards stopping him.
• They have high-major size, their starting lineup has good size at all 5 spots. They really
only have one rotation player that is a little undersized.
• They have a good amount of size and defensive versatility. They can play multiple
coverages with big men and wings that have length, include some zone looks.
• They are aggressive at the point of attack defensively, getting opponents out of their
sets and speeding up their offense
• Their size allows them to get a lot of rebounds on both ends
• They draw a good number of fouls when they are attacking the rim
• They do a great job of scheme execution defensively, preventing shots from inside the
paint at a high rate. They also protect the rim well.
• They don’t really have any major weak individuals on defense
• The size allows them to defend the post well
• They have enough length to contest shots outside the arc despite the aggressive help
Weaknesses
• They don’t have a true lead ball handler that can give their offense some flow and
make good decisions. Poor playmaking team. They turn the ball over a lot.
• They force a ton of bad shots. Allen is the main culprit of this, as he can truly shoot
you out of a game with the way he plays.
• This is not a very good shooting team overall. Rice and Allen need to be guarded but
they don’t hit a high percentage of their 3s.
• The settling from the outside prevents a ton of pressure on the rim offensively
• They will give up a ton of 3s within their scheme
• They struggle to score in ball screens with lack of handlers and lack of spacing
• They will use the post but do not score there efficiently
• They are not good at defending ball screens; the drop coverage doesn’t work too well
with the big men that they have
Evaluation
New Mexico State is in the tourney after winning the WAC Tournament as the 1 seed. They have built
their team around high-major transfer Teddy Allen, and it has led to good results. New Mexico State’s
success starts with the defensive side of the floor. They have legit high-major size, which bothers teams
they play against. They play an aggressive style that forces opponents out of their offense. They prevent
shots at the rim, and the ones that do get there are contested well. They have good defensive versatility.
Offensively, they are a little more questionable. Teddy Allen will get shots up. He shoots a ton of tough
looks, and whether or not they happen to be going in that game could determine if they win. Rice is also
a good offensive player who can create some shots. However, I don’t trust their offensive process. The
size won’t be as big of an advantage at higher levels, and I am really concerned about the shot selection.
They just lack so much playmaking that I think they will really struggle against better defenses.
Defensively, I do worry about the amount of 3s they give up and their weakness in ball screen defense.
This team has size, defense, and one player that could give them a shot to stay in a game, but I don’t
trust them as much as some do. They are capable of winning a game, but it is certainly less likely than
their statistical profile would suggest for me.
11.55. Bryant
Depth Chart
Coach: Jared Grasso
PG: Luis Hertado | Guard | 6’6” B1: Greg Calixte | Big | 6’8”
SG: Charles Pride | Guard | 6’4” B2: Tyler Brelsford | Guard | 6’4”
SF: Peter Kiss | Guard | 6’5” B3: Erickson Bans | Guard | 5’11”
PF: Adham Eleeda | Guard | 6’5” B4: Josh Ozabor | Forward | 6’5”
C: Hall Elisias | Big | 6’8” B5: Mike Iuzzolino | Guard | 6’3”
Player Stats

• Peter Kiss: Scores a ridiculous number of points. He may not have the greatest efficiency but has solid
efficiency on wild volume. Really good athlete, can get to the rim. Inconsistent shooter but takes tough
3s. Really gets out in transition to score. Will also get a lot of steals.
• Charles Pride: Another really good scorer on crazy volume. Not as good of an individual creator as Kiss
but a better shooter from deep. Scores really well coming off ball screens. Good size and solid athlete.
Has a good handle. Gets out a lot in transition as well.
• Adham Eleeda: Best shooter on the team. Plays far less with the ball in his hands than the other
guards but is really good within his role off the ball. Percentages could be better for his role. Gets out in
transition to shoot. Not a great athlete.
• Hall Elsias: Starting center and insane athlete. Doesn’t have great height, but really long arms and elite
athleticism. Blocks a lot of shots and can switch on the perimeter. Doesn’t have great hands and lacks
feel for the game.
• Luis Hurtado: Oversized ball handler, will bring the ball up the floor and initiate sets. Solid playmaker.
Not much of a scoring threat and doesn’t fit as a shooter.
• Greg Calixte: Backup center but sometimes plays more minutes than the starter. Has a little more skill
and feel. Undersized 5 but a good athlete.
• Tyler Brelsford: Backup guard who plays limited minutes. Can handle the ball some and will get out in
transition. Hasn’t shot the ball well this season.
• Erickson Bans: Backup player that plays some limited minutes. Has really struggled to score the ball
efficiently.
Scheme
• They will throw a lot of junk defense at you. 2-3 zone and 1-3-1 zone are the most
used options. Can also go to ¾ court press and full court press.
• When they go man, they will mostly switch everything
• They push the pace a ton. Leak out on every rebound and steal.
• Mostly play through sets but best players will improvise out of initial aciton
Strengths
• They’re very unique in their defensive coverages. They throw a lot of different stuff at
you. Most of it is junk coverages that can really give some teams issues.
• They get out in transition a ton. Guards will always leak out and get easy points.
• They have two really dynamic scorers in Kiss and Pride. They are able to get their own
shots and each have a complete greenlight to shoot it.
• They crash the offensive glass and get a lot of offensive rebounds
• high volume 3-point shooting team, creating some variance in outcomes.
• They will really attack the defense. Everything they do is with a ton of pace. Generate
shots at the rim and from 3 with their pace and energy.
• They score well out of ball screens with their best players handling the ball. They gain a
lot of advantages as scorers that way.
• Running weird defenses makes it so teams can’t play to their preferred man offenses.
There is also a lot of defensive versatility here.
Weaknesses
• They shoot a ton of 3s but have been really inconsistent shooting. Their 3-point
percentage on the year is bad.
• They can play out of control. Their quick pace can lead to the other team also getting
easy shots in transition with Bryant taking bad shots and turning the ball over.
• The offense can get stagnant with Kiss and Pride forcing some shots. This especially
happens if they can’t get out in transition.
• They tend to give up a lot of shots at the rim. They make a lot of mistakes within their
own defenses and smarter teams can exploit them at times.
• The selection of which shots to take in transition can be questionable. They are not
very efficient overall in transition because it can be forced.
• The overall defensive ability at the point of attack isn’t very good. There are a ton of
times where the defense gets collapsed because of breakdowns at the point of attack.
Evaluation
Bryant is an incredibly interesting team. They are seeded really low because they are coming out of a
really weak conference and have really bad metrics. However, I think their style of play gives them a
fighting chance to win a game in the tournament. They run up and down the court the entire game.
Their transition attack is absolutely relentless. They shoot a ton of 3s. They have two really talented
scorers in Kiss and Pride. They also play with a frenetic pace on defense. They will throw a bunch of
different defenses at you, whether it be full court traps, half court zones, or switching man defenses.
This Bryant team also has solid size and athleticism. They play in such a ridiculous way that it gives them
a lot of variation in the tournament. There may be more outcomes for this team to get blown out, but
there is also a greater possibility for them to win by a couple points because of their style. There are
certain types of teams Bryant can scale against. Against a team with poor guard play or someone that
wants to really grind down the pace, I think Bryant can bother them. However, against a bigger mid-
major team with some athleticism and high-level guards, I don’t think their style would work. At the end
of the day, Bryant shoots so many 3s that their 3-point percentage could determine whether or not they
even have a shot. Being this high on a Bryant team that all the metrics hate is definitely a shot in the
dark, but I think there is a real variance in outcomes here with their style.
11.56. Longwood
Depth Chart
Coach: Griff Aldrich
PG: Justin Hill | Guard | 6’0” B1: Jordan Perkins | Guard | 6’1”
SG: DeShaun Wade | Guard | 6’2” B2: D’Avian Houston | Guard | 6’1”
SF: Isaiah Wilkens | Guard | 6’4” B3: Leslie Nkereuwem | Forward | 6’7”
PF: Jesper Granlund | Forward | 6’6” B4: Nate Lliteras | Wing | 6’7”
C: Zac Watson | Forward | 6’7” B5: Jaylani Darden | Guard | 6’5”
Player Stats

• Justin Hill: Lead ball handler, small guard that pushes the pace. Really good playmaker out of pick and
roll. Generates a lot of paint touches. Capable shooter and active defender. One of the better players in
the Big South.
• Isaiah Wilkins: High-major transfer. Big and strong frame. Really good shooter but can also get to the
rim. Good defensively. Can score well in transition. Not much of a playmaker.
• DeShaun Wade: Really good shooter. Opens up a lot of their sets Can handle the ball some, but better
off the ball.
• Zac Watson: Plays center and does well as a rim runner. He’s very undersized compared to high-major
centers. Does well in their defensive system but not a major rim protector.
• Leslie Nkereuwem: Athletic forward, comes off the bench as a center. A little more strength than
Watson. Good in their screening actions.
• Jesper Granlund: Really good shooter, can attack some closeouts. Moves well without the ball, good
ball mover, fits well within the system.
• Nate Lliteras: Shooter off the bench. Has good size and has range on the jumper.
• D’Avian Houston: Plays off the bench as a guard, doesn’t have a ton of responsibility to handle the
ball. Can hit open shots.
Scheme
• They play out of sets, but offense is designed to get the floor spaced and ball
moving with the players then reading and reacting. Emphasis on the dribble drive.
• Show on pick and rolls
• Deny from one pass away, play aggressive on the ball, and aggressively help on drives.
They fly around the court.
• Push the ball really hard in transition, especially off of opponent turnovers
Strengths
• Offense spaces the floor really well and runs great sets. Everything is designed to let
the players get paint touches and play out of that.
• Guards can really attack a moving defense. Initial action gets the ball moving side to
side, then the guards attack the paint and can finish or kick out.
• They have really good shooters. The shooting opens up what they can run and allows
the floor to be really spaced.
• Ball and players really move. Actions will often go to the second or third side.
• They have good point of attack defense and their players do a great job of helping on
drives. Their defense forces a lot of turnovers on digs.
• A lot of their offense operates out of ball screens, and they have multiple players that
can initiate them. Hill is the best. Good spacing and roll men are solid finishers.
• They do a good job of doubling in the post then helping and rotating
• They draw a lot of fouls with their offensive style of play
• They will effectively attack the offensive glass
Weaknesses
• This is a very small team. They are one of the smallest teams in Division 1 and will be
undersized at every position.
• Sometimes they are not as good at finishing against more size
• They a really poor good rim protecting team because of the lack of size
• The aggressive help gives up a lot of looks from 3 for opponents
• Pick and roll defense is going to be a struggle against better teams with asking smaller
players to tag the roll man
• They have to bring a lot of help to defend in the post, and I wonder what that looks
like against better teams
Evaluation
It’s a great story for a small team from a small school in Farmville, Virginia, to make the tournament.
Their coach, Griff Aldrich, was involved with the UMBC team that upset Virginia in the first round of the
Tournament a few seasons ago. Longwood is one of the more interesting teams that are seeded low.
They run a beautiful style of offense. They have a ton of player and ball movement. They run a lot of
sets, but the players do a good job of making reads and attacking outside of the sets. There is excellent
spacing with emphasis on getting downhill and getting paint touches. They run sets for their shooters to
get open, and they can really hit shots. They will also push the ball in transition to get easy looks.
Defensively, they play an aggressive style. They fly around in help, pressure the ball, and can cause some
trouble for teams. The most concerning thing for Longwood in the tournament is how small they are.
They are undersized at every position, and their two centers are 6’7”. While this allows them to play
faster and fly around on both ends, it really limits their ability to protect the rim. They have to bring a lot
of help in the post, and while they do a good job of rotating and helping it is not ideal. They also allow a
lot of good looks from 3 within their scheme. Their lack of size makes me wonder how well they will
scale against better teams, but their style can cause problems, especially with their offense. This team is
capable of a major upset with a great shooting performance and poor shooting from their opponent.
Ultimately, their lack of size will be their downfall if they can’t pull it off.
11.57. Jacksonville State
Depth Chart
Coach: Ray Harper
PG: Jalen Finch | Guard | 6’1” B1: Demaree King | Guard | 6’0”
SG: Jalen Gibbs | Guard | 6’3” B2: Maros Zeliznak | Big | 6’11”
SF: Darian Adams | Guard | 6’3” B3: Juwan Perdue | Forward | 6’6”
PF: Kayne Henry | Wing | 6’7” B4: Jay Pal | Forward | 6’9”
C: Brandon Huffman | Big | 6’10” B5: Semaj Henderson | Guard | 6’2”
Player Stats

• Darian Adams: Really talented three-level scorer. One of the best players in his league. Can hit shots
really well but can handle the ball and get paint touches. Can make some plays as a playmaker. Tough
shot maker. Decent but not great athlete.
• Jalen Gibbs: Really good shooter. Great percentages on a high volume. Good athlete. Takes and makes
tough shots. Struggles to score from inside the arc.
• Demaree King: Small guard off the bench, really good scorer. Used primarily as a shooter, can shoot it
coming off screens or off the dribble. Really dangerous.
• Kayne Henry: Athletic wing, good rebounder and slasher. Capable shooter but not reliable from out
there. Really good in transition, can post some smaller players.
• Brandon Huffman: Starting center, has good size and strength. Not a bad athlete, but not the most
coordinated. Very good rebounder and solid shot blocker. Good finisher. Will get post touches but isn’t
great with them.
• Jalen Finch: Smaller guard, best playmaker on the team. Best used as a pick and roll playmaker. Good
quickness and handle. Not a great at getting his own looks. Can shoot. Skinny and undersized.
• Maros Zeliznak: Limited role off the bench, not too much of an offensive threat. Backup center with
good size.
• Juwan Perdue: Athletic forward off the bench. Not a shooter, solid defensive player in his role.
• Jay Pal: Forward off the bench that can play either the 4 or 5. Skinny, but a good athlete and versatile.
Guards multiple positions. Limited offensive role.
Scheme
• Play at the level of screens
• Will play out of sets with 3 out spacing, also some continuity ball screen
Strengths
• Ball screen heavy offense featuring two really good scorers out of it in Adams and
Gibbs, both threats in different ways
• They have three guards that can really shoot the ball in Adams, Gibbs, and King. All of
them can use their shooting gravity to create other offense. All are high volume and high
percentage players.
• They do an excellent job of defending the rim without fouling
• They execute their scheme well, it’s difficult to get into the paint against them. Guards
have some athleticism and do a good job at the point of attack.
• They run good actions with their pick and rolls. There will be optimal spacing or
movement on the weakside. They create open shots.
• They are very efficient in transition
• Adams gives them a player that can really create his own shot. They tend to run down
the shot clock on their offensive possessions and he can bail them out.
• They are an athletic mid-major team throughout their rotation
Weaknesses
• Their defensive scheme gives up a ton of really good looks from behind the arc
• They can struggle to defend the ball handler in pick and roll. Their ball screen
coverages don’t necessarily match their overall scheme and their big men don’t do a
great job in execution. They also struggle with their tags, especially with smalls.
• They rarely force turnovers despite their relative physical tools to their competition
• They turn the ball over a good amount. It’s a result of their slower half-court offense
at times.
• They lack size on the perimeter at the 1-3 spots
• Paint touches can be tough to generate from their primary ball handlers
• Post ups are a part of their offense that really shouldn’t be
• They will struggle against high-level post players
Evaluation
Jacksonville State enters the tournament in a very unconventional way. Despite losing in the semifinals
of their conference tournament, they qualify for the tourney because of a terrible rule disallowing
Bellarmine to participate in the tournament because of a “transition” to from Division II. Anyways,
Jacksonville State was the number one seed in the conference tournament and the second-best team in
the conference according to the predictive metrics, so this appearance is still earned. Jacksonville State
operates within a ball screen heavy offense featuring three guards that can really score out of them in
Adams, Gibbs, and King. They run some interesting actions within their ball screens, incorporating
roll/rise, roll/replace, or even exit screens to create space and shots. They also have three really
talented shooters plus one good shooter creator in Darian Adams. Defensively, they play a no-middle
style with solid athleticism on the perimeter. They do a good job of preventing paint touches for their
opponents. The path for Jacksonville State to win a game in the tournament would be to get a matchup
against a team with really bad pick and roll coverages, hit a lot of shots, and hope for some opponent
misses. Jacksonville State definitely has some factors that play against that happening. Their defense
gives up a lot of good looks from 3 and they struggle to defend ball screens. That is a recipe for disaster
against high-major competition. They will also struggle against better post players in the tournament.
Jacksonville State has a baseline level of athleticism and good scheme on both ends of the floor to give
them any sort of chance, but it’s unlikely.
11.58. Colgate
Depth Chart
Coach: Matt Langel
PG: Nelly Cummings | Guard | 6’0” B1: Oliver Lynch-Daniels | Guard | 6’2”
SG: Jack Ferguson | Guard | 6’3” B2: Jeff Woodward | Big | 6’11”
SF: Tucker Richardson | Guard | 6’5” B3: Sam Thompson | Forward | 6’9”
PF: Ryan Moffatt | Wing | 6’6” B4: Nicholas Louis-Jacques | Guard | 6’4”
C: Keegan Records | Big | 6’10” B5: Zach Light | Guard | 6’3”
Player Stats

• Tucker Richardson: Best two-way player on the team. Really good shooter but can also handle the ball
and make passing reads at his size. Good defender as well.
• Nelly Cummings: Best pure shot creator on the team. Smaller guard who can shoot the ball and get
some paint touches. Fits well within their system as their point guard, good high usage pick and roll
player.
• Jack Ferguson: Great shooter, highest volume guy on the team. Does not do a ton else outside of
shooting but is elite within his role.
• Keegan Records: Starting center, has decent size and is a solid passer. Uses his size well to defend the
rim. Can be used to some extent in the post.
• Ryan Moffatt: Incredibly high percentage shooter and great cutter. Used far more off the ball and
doesn’t do much with the ball, but great player in the system with good size.
• Olivier Lynch-Daniels: Small guard off the bench. Really used off the ball, has serious limitations on it,
but is a ridiculous shooter.
• Jeff Woodward: Backup center, biggest player in their rotation. Will be used to post a lot of smaller
players off opponents’ bench, solid passing out of the post as well. Good rebounder.
Scheme
• 4 out motion offense. Tons of screens and player movement, players are able to
make reads and created to weaponize the shooting ability.
• Pack line defense, give a good amount of help in the gaps
Strengths
• They are one of the best shooting teams in the country. They run a 4 out offense and
all 4 of their perimeter players are really high-level shooters. They are arguably the very
best shooting team in college basketball.
• They execute their offense really well. They have been running it for years and it
continues to generate results. Players play very well within the system; the ball and
player movement is always good and there is real flow to what they do.
• They rarely turn the ball over, everyone that plays is a solid passer
• Great shot selection. Only shots from 3 or at the rim, nothing is forced.
• They score efficiently using the post because of the spacing and shooters
• Teams that bring two to the ball in pick and roll coverage struggle to defend their ball
screens
• Very good team at moving without the ball
• They do a solid job of defending ball screens within their drop scheme; their big men
have enough size to execute
• They have defended well in the post in their league
• Excellent overall passing team. They are taught the skip pass really well.
Weaknesses
• They are going to be at a massive athleticism disadvantage against any high-major
team they play against
• Defensive personnel is bad at most spots. They play a certain style, and the shooters
required to play their style generally don’t give you a ton at the other end.
• They play a very conservative defensive scheme that rarely forces turnovers
• Their depth is lacking, they only bring 2 players off the bench to play heavy minutes
• They don’t have a ton of individual shot creation; it can be hard for them to generate
paint touches despite all of the movement
• They are lacking that one playmaker to tie their offense together and bring it to
another level
• They allow a lot of shots at the rim because of their limitations
• They are very bd at defending in transition
Evaluation
The dominant program in the Patriot League is heading to the tournament once again. Matt Langel
deserves a ton of recognition for the program he’s been able to build at Colgate. They have a system
that consistently gives them a shot to do anything in March. They run a 4 out motion offense they have
been running for years, and Langel recruits the shooters to execute. This is arguably the best shooting
team in the country. They shoot a crazy percentage at their volume. The shooting opens up everything
for the offense, making all of their actions more dangerous and effective. They are also a very good
collective passing and cutting team. Outside of the movement and shooting, this team is a tough sell.
The defense is sacrificed for the benefit of the offensive style. It just isn’t very good at all. The personnel
needed to make their offense thrive is not the personnel needed to build a cohesive defense. They are
really poor at the point of attack. Offensively, they just aren’t good enough for that to be what they do.
They lack a high-level shot creator for themselves and others to tie everything together. They at least
have somewhat of a chance to win a game in March purely off shooting luck, but they are at such a
disadvantage almost everywhere else it’s tough to see.
11.59. Saint Peter’s
Depth Chart
Coach: Shaheen Holloway
PG: Matthew Lee | Guard | 6’0” B1: Fousseyni Drame | Forward | 6’7”
SG: Doug Edert | Guard | 6’2” B2: Isiah Dasher | Guard | 6’3”
SF: Daryl Banks | Guard | 6’3” B3: Jaylen Murray | Guard | 5’11”
PF: Hassan Drame | Forward | 6’7” B4: Clarence Rupert | Forward | 6’8”
C: KC Ndefo | Forward | 6’7” B5: Oumar Diahame | Big | 6’10”
Player Stats

• KC Ndefo: Ridiculous defensive playmaker. Gets a ton of blocks and steals, feels like he is all over the
place. Guards on the inside and the perimeter. Improved skill level, can slash to the paint and finish.
Draws a lot of fouls. Can make some plays with his scoring gravity. Not a shooter.
• Daryl Banks: Scoring guard that can make some tough shots. Creates on the perimeter for himself and
can come off screens and shoot. Not much of a playmaker. Good perimeter defender.
• Doug Edert: Shooter that can attack closeouts. Has some craft in the lane to finish. Not tasked with a
lot of shot creation and limited playmaking responsibilities. Solid defender.
• Matthew Lee: Small guard, capable of scoring at three levels. Gets good elevation on the jumper and
hits shots at a solid rate. Best playmaker on the team. Solid point of attack defender.
• Fousseyni Drame: Really good rebounder, high motor and can provide decent rim protection. Mostly
used as a backup 5, can also slide up to play the 4. Good play finisher, doesn’t have much craft.
• Hassan Drame: Very similar role to Fousseyni Drame. Athletic and high motor, good defender while
lacking some offensive skill. Can defend more on the perimeter but not as good of a rebounder.
• Jaylen Murray: Small guard, can handle the ball off the bench. Not as good defensively but can give
them a little more offense. Hasn’t been the most efficient player.
• Isiah Dasher: Guard off the bench in a limited offensive role. Can attack a little off the bounce but not
much of a shooter. Not as good defensively as the other guards.
• Clarence Rupert: Bigger player that will play a lot at the backup 5. Biggest player on the team, decent
athlete.
Scheme
• Aggressive defensively at the point of attack, they pick up at half court but don’t bring
a ton of help from one pass away
• Will collapse on drives to the rim
• Can play at the level or switch on ball screens
• Offense is mostly run out of sets
Strengths
• Point of attack defense is very strong, the guards and wings do an excellent job of
staying in front of their man
• They have defensive versatility and major athleticism with their frontcourt. Ndefo is
ridiculous, but the other players provide a lot of similar stuff.
• They force a lot of turnovers with their pressure. It’s difficult to run your stuff against
them and a lot of teams can get sped up.
• They get a lot of offensive rebounds with athletic players crashing hard
• They draw a lot of fouls by attacking the rim with their forwards. They do a really good
job of getting into the paint and putting pressure on the rim.
• They have multiple players that can really come over and contest shots at the rim.
Nothing is easy, especially when multiple frontcourt players are swarming.
• They prevent a lot of opponent 3s by staying attached from one pass away
• Their pick and roll defense is really strong with their guards and switchable frontcourt
players. At the level coverage always has an athlete to tag.
Weaknesses
• There is no space for anyone to operate. They run good actions but get nothing out of
the because of the space and general personnel. They lack offensive talent.
• This team has a major lack of playmaking and perimeter ability to generate open looks
• They do not get up a lot of shots from deep. Most of their rotation is made up of non-
shooters, making it difficult for their better shooters to get clean looks.
• They may not have enough size for their style of play to scale
• They can get to the rim, but finishing is a major issue for their frontcourt. They lack
touch and craft around the rim.
• They are a very high turnover team offensively
• They foul a ton with their aggressive defensive style
• Defending really good post players may be an issue for them
• They do not have the personnel to reliably run pick and roll offensively
Evaluation
Saint Peter’s has made the tournament after winning the MAAC Championship. They might be the team
that is most slanted towards one area of the floor out of any team in the country. The defense is what
has gotten Saint Peter’s this far. They play an aggressive style at the point of attack with guards that
defend well there. They have excellent back line help, especially with Ndefo roaming. They also have a
really athletic frontcourt that can switch out onto the perimeter but also block shots on the interior. This
is a legitimately good defense. Offensively, they are really bad. They attack the rim without being able to
finish consistently there, they can’t generate any open looks from deep, and just lack general talent on
that end of the floor. The defense has been enough to make up for that so far, but that will be
questionable in the tournament. They are undersized and their athleticism advantage will dwindle
against better competition. They may be able to make it difficult on a team with their defense, but I
don’t see how they can score enough points to make them pay. The hope is to play a team with poor
guard play, get out in transition, and hit a lucky number of shots. Saint Peter’s is good enough on one
end of the floor that winning a game in the tournament is a possibility, but the offense is so poor that it
would be really surprising.
11.60. Akron
Depth Chart
Coach: John Groce
PG: Xavier Castaneda | Guard | 6’1” B1: Garvin Clarke | Guard | 6’0”
SG: Greg Tribble | Guard | 6’1” B2: Aziz Bandaogo | Big | 7’0”
SF: Mikal Dawson | Wing | 6’5” B3: Michael Wynn | Wing | 6’6”
PF: Ali Ali | Forward | 6’8” B4: Evan Wilson | Guard | 6’2”
C: Enrique Freeman | Forward | 6’7” B5: Sekou Kalle | Forward | 6’10”
Player Stats

• Ali Ali: Big wing that can handle the ball, hit shots, and is a fluid athlete. Interesting and versatile
player, and his versatility on both ends is utilized. Very good three-level scorer.
• Xavier Castaneda: Lead ball handler, good scorer off the dribble. Good shooter with pull up ability in
the midrange. Makes a lot of tough shots. Not a great playmaker and doesn’t get to the rim. Good point
of attack defender.
• Enrique Freeman: Starting center, undersized but is a good athlete and moves his feet well. Good post
player, can also make some passes out of there. Great rebounder, solid rim protector. Great defender.
• Greg Tribble: Guard that can handle the ball and make plays. Good athlete and strong frame, really
tries to slash to the rim. Not a shooter at all, which limits him. Solid perimeter defender.
• Mikal Dawson: 3 and D wing. Has some size and length, solid athlete. High volume shooter, good
mover off the ball. Solid defender with his size.
• Garvin Clarke: Small guard off the bench that can make some plays. Can handle the ball and initiate
some action, capable spot up shooter. Doesn’t do much inside the arc. Size and athleticism limitations.
• Aziz Bandaogo: Big center that plays limited minutes. Slight frame, but solid athlete. Not much of an
offensive threat at all, but an impactful defensive player with his length.
• Michael Wynn: Limited player off the bench. Has some size and can defend.
Scheme
• They will play at the level of ball screens, can also do some switching
• Really slow pace
• They will walk the ball up and play through sets
Strengths
• They have some defensive versatility in their frontcourt with Ali and Freeman, allows
them to execute their scheme well
• They have good athleticism for a mid-major
• They have real shot-making ability with Ali and Castaneda
• Point of attack defense is a strength of this team. The guards that play do a good job of
containing the ball.
• They draw a lot of free throws
• They have multiple players that are shooting threats in Ali, Castaneda, and Dawson.
They are used well within their actions.
• The 4/5 duo of Ali and Freeman are used really well in big pick and rolls and high/low
actions that is tough for a lot of teams to defend
• They have some length and have done a good job of protecting the rim
• Really good at scoring out of ball screens with their shot makers
• Freeman is used well in the post, is surrounded by shooting when the double comes
• Freeman has done a good job of defending in the post
Weaknesses
• The size and athleticism of their frontcourt will not be an advantage against high-
major programs
• They really lack playmaking; their best players are more looking to score
• They are reliant on a lot of tough shots to generate offense
• They play some lesser shooters, including Tribble
• Getting to the rim is a major struggle for this team, they just don’t have a lot of players
that can generate rim pressure from the perimeter
• They do allow a decent amount of shot attempts at the rim
• They give up some good shots from deep within their scheme
Evaluation
After winning the MAC tournament as the 4 seed, Akron advances to the NCAA tournament. Akron was
likely better than that seed would indicate, and they showed it. They are an interesting team on both
ends. Offensively, they have players that can really hit shots. They have two players in Casteneda and Ali
that can hit a lot of shots from the midrange and from 3. They run their offense through sets, and they
do some interesting stuff. They have a 4/5 combination in Ali and Freeman that will run interesting
actions together, which is difficult to defend for most teams. Defensively, they have solid personnel at
the point of attack. They also have Freeman on the back line, who has been a really good defensive
player this season. They have some versatility within their no-middle scheme with their athleticism. I do
have concerns. They are fairly reliant on making tougher shots to generate offense. They lack the ability
to get to the rim. They also don’t really have much playmaking on that end. Defensively, Freeman is
great but doesn’t have a lot of size. I wonder if he’s still an elite defender against high-major teams.
They will also give up a good number of shots at the rim and some really good looks from 3. Overall,
Akron plays a slower pace and has some shooting, which can lead to variance within their results. That’s
good for a lower seed in March. They are going to be heavy underdogs but could possibly compete.
Pulling off a win will rely on opponents missing a lot of shots and Akron hitting the tougher looks they
take, which is fairly unlikely to me.
11.61. Texas Southern
Depth Chart
Coach: Johnny Jones
PG: PJ Henry | Guard | 5’10” B1: Jordan Gilliam | Guard | 6’5”
SG: Bryson Etienne | Guard | 6’3” B2: John Walker | Forward | 6’9”
SF: A.J. Lawson | Guard | 6’5” B3: Justin Hopkins | Guard | 6’5”
PF: Brison Gresham | Forward | 6’8” B4: Yahuza Rasas | Forward | 6’7”
C: Joirdon Karl Nicholas | Forward | 6’9” B5: John Jones | Guard | 6’0”
Player Stats

• John Walker: Big, athletic forward that can step out and hit shots. Can also post up and is a solid
finisher around the rim. Good rim protector.
• Joirdon Karl Nicholas: Another athletic forward, has some positional versatility. Good shot blocker and
really good rebounder. Doesn’t have great touch but uses size to finish.
• Bryson Etienne: Highest volume shooter on the team, capable shooter and shot creator. Struggles to
finish inside the arc. One of the better playmakers on the team. Good wing defender.
• PJ Henry: Smaller shot creator that can shoot. Can hit tougher jumpers in the midrange, one of the
better shot creators on the team. Undersized, but a good athlete.
• Brison Gresham: Big forward, most traditional big on the team. Doesn’t step out on the perimeter,
more of a rebounder and shot blocker. Has a bigger frame than the other big men.
• Justin Hopkins: Wing that is a good slasher and cutter, good finisher. Limited offensive role but plays
more minutes as a good defender in their system.
• A.J. Lawson: Another wing with size and solid athleticism. Works well in transition, can struggle to
create efficient offense. Good defensively.
• John Jones: Smaller guard that can generate some more offense off the dribble. Not going to create
much for others but can be a threat from deep. Size limits him defensively.
• Jordan Gilliam: Another athletic wing with size. Very limited offensive role, can make some spot ups
but isn’t asked to do much else. Good defender with versatility.
• Yahuza Rosas: Lower minute forward, has a high motor. Really good rebounder.
Scheme
• Play fast and aggressive on both ends of the floor
• Aggressive no middle, will ice ball screens but can also hedge or play at the level.
Will switch a lot off the ball.
• Will play with more sets offensively
Strengths
• Great size and athleticism for a mid-major. They run through a lot of players in a
similar archetype that can do similar things from an athleticism standpoint.
• They have a deep bench, allowing them to play really hard at both ends at all times. No
one plays more players off the bench for longer than this team. A lot of their best
players come off the bench.
• Defensive aggression causes issues for some teams. They are good at the point of
attack defensively at a lot of spots. Big men can also do some switching.
• Really good offensive rebounding team. All the of athletic forwards crash.
• They do a really good job of contesting shots from beyond the arc
• Everything at the rim is contested by multiple players. They have the length to bother
and block a lot of shots.
• They have some defensive versatility with athleticism up and down the rotation
• They run in transition all game long
• Pick and roll defense has been very good, it is difficult to hit the roll man against them
Weaknesses
• They cannot generate good looks offensively at all. They have very little shooting, and
the players have no space to operate with.
• The shots at the rim they get are always very contested or players shooting them
don’t have great touch to finish
• They lack playmaking and ball handling talent
• They commit a lot of fouls defensively with their aggression
• They allow more shots at the rim than they should with their personnel and scheme
• There is very little shot creation on this team
• Pick and rolls generate nothing for this team offensively with zero space and
suboptimal ball handlers
Evaluation
After starting the season with seven straight losses, Texas Southern has bounced back to make the
NCAA Tournament after winning the SWAC. Texas Southern reminds me of a mid-major version of
Florida State. They run through a lot of players that play lower minutes, a lot of their best players come
off the bench, they rely on defense, and they have a lot of length and athleticism. The formula for Texas
Southern is to get enough stops on the defensive end and pound the ball on the interior offensively.
They have a wild amount of 6’7”-6’9” athletes for the conference they play in. It allows them to have a
defense that is very tough to score against on the interior. Their smaller perimeter players are also good
athletes and good point of attack defenders, making it difficult to run your offense against them. The
idea of this team falls apart when you look at the offensive side of the ball. They are very reliant on
transition to generate anything positive. They really lack perimeter shooting and playmaking talent. It’s
very difficult for them to generate good looks in the half court with little spacing. They get a lot of shots
in the interior, but they are generally contested, and the players shooting don’t have great touch. This
team can be somewhat interesting because their defense may be able to scale. They have so much
length, and there are teams out there that could be bothered by the aggression. It’s tough to see their
offense generating enough to win a game in the tourney. They only hope is to get a ton out in transition
and get very lucky with shooting. They have the size and athleticism, but they don’t nearly have enough
skill for them to be ranked higher.
11.62. Georgia State
Depth Chart
Coach: Rob Lanier
PG: Justin Roberts | Guard | 6’0” B1: Nelson Phillips | Guard | 6’3”
SG: Coery Allen | Guard | 6’1” B2: Ja’Heim Hudson | Forward | 6’7”
SF: Kane Williams | Guard | 6’3” B3: Evan Johnson | Guard | 5’10”
PF: Eliel Nsoseme | Forward | 6’8” B4: Collin Moore | Guard | 6’3”
C: Jalen Thomas | Forward | 6’10” B5: Kalik Brooks | Guard | 6’3”
Player Stats

• Corey Allen: Dynamic guard, highest usage player on the team. Good shooter and can create in the
midrange. Has a good handle. Has had some really impressive scoring performances this season.
• Kane Williams: Best guard at getting to the rim and creating that way on this team. Good shot creator,
can create for others because of the rim pressure. Shot hasn’t fallen this season from deep.
• Justin Roberts: Small guard, can create some shots in the midrange and from deep. Good shooter.
Quick because of his size. More comfortable off the ball, which isn’t great for his size.
• Eliel Nsoseme: Versatile forward, really good rebounder and shot blocker for his size. Good athlete
and high motor. Capable finisher but not very skilled offensively.
• Jalen Thomas: Biggest player on the team but doesn’t operate a lot near the rim offensively. More
comfortable in the midrange but not efficient. Decent athlete, solid rim protector and rebounder.
• Nelson Phillips: Wing off the bench, has been injured. Good athlete and can get out in transition.
Good positional size. Capable shooter.
• Evan Johnson: Small guard off the bench tasked to score the ball. Shoots a good volume but 3 hasn’t
been falling this season. Very undersized.
• Ja’Heim Hudson: Forward off the bench with some size and versatility. Capable of hitting shots. Not a
reliable shooter and not great with the ball. Solid defender.
Scheme
• Flat coverage on ball screens
• Play mostly through sets on offense
• Heavily push the ball
Strengths
• They do a good job in scheme execution. Guards are quick and big men move their
feet well to get in position to prevent paint touches.
• They have three guards capable of creating their own offense in Allen, Williams, and
Roberts. Allen is probably the most dynamic of the bunch.
• They do a very good job within their pick and roll coverages. Big men are mobile and
they always have another versatile big near the rim to tag the roller.
• They force a lot of turnovers defensively
• The big men do a good job of getting in position and protecting the rim
• Their big men are good offensive rebounders, especially Nsoseme
• They have players capable of catching fire from behind the arc and from the midrange,
shot making is solid
• They are a quick team with the combination of their guards and athletic big men
• They have done a good job of defending the post in their league They have players
capable of catching fire from behind the arc and from the midrange, shot making is solid
Weaknesses
• They really struggle to generate any offense inside of the arc. Players don’t do a very
good job of getting all the way to the rim and finishing is poor.
• Size on the perimeter is going to be an issue for this team. Thomas is also not a very
physical center, and their other big men are undersized for their role.
• They are not a good defensive rebounding team
• They play an aggressive defensive style, which leads to a lot of good looks for
opponents from 3 and a lot of free throws
• Overall playmaking is a major weakness for this team
• They are not a very reliable shooting team
• Their guards struggle to create any good looks out of ball screens
• Shot selection is very questionable, offense can also get very stagnant
Evaluation
After losing a lot of games in their early conference schedule, Georgia State has rallied to win their last
10 games and qualify for the NCAA Tournament. This team has dynamic guards that can create off the
dribble, big men that move their feet well, and a group of players that have a high motor and execute
their scheme. They have had a solid defense this season within their no-middle scheme. Their big man
rotation can all move their feet and are good athletes, allowing them to bring help early outside of the
paint. The guards are quick and execute the scheme as well. Offensively, the combination of Allen,
Williams, and Roberts is adept at creating their own shots. This is a solid mid-major team, but I don’t see
how their offense scales against any high-major. They struggle to create any good looks inside the arc.
They don’t generate a lot of paint touches but also aren’t super comfortable creating from beyond the
arc. This leads to a high proportion of midrange jumpers they just don’t make enough of. The guards are
all capable of getting hot and having good individual games, but none of them are reliable creators for
others. The offensive rebounding won’t scale as well either. Defensively, their lack of size on the
perimeter will catch up to them against a high major team. They also give up a lot of good looks from 3
within their scheme, which will not scale well. Maybe there is an outside chance that all their guards are
hitting shots and their opponent can’t make anything, but that’s the only scenario in which I can see
Georgia State winning a game in the tournament.
12.63. Norfolk State
Depth Chart
Coach: Robert Jones
PG: Joe Bryant | Guard | 6’1” B1: Christian Ings | Guard | 6’2”
SG: Jalen Hawkins | Guard | 6’2” B2: Daryl Anderson | Wing | 6’6”
SF: Tyrese Jenkins | Wing | 6’6” B3: Nyzaiah Chambers | Forward | 6’7”
PF: Dana Tate | Forward | 6’7” B4: Cahiem Brown | Guard | 6’5”
C: Kris Bankston | Big | 6’8” B5: Chris Ford | Forward | 6’8”
Player Stats

• Joe Bryant: Best player on the team, primary ball handler. Three level scorer. Really good shooter from
deep with range on the shot, can make them off movement. Decent playmaker. Handles the ball a lot in
ball screens, does really well. Good perimeter defender.
• Jalen Hawkins: Good secondary scorer. Good slasher and cutter, can also make 3s. More of a scorer
than playmaker. Good defender on and off the ball.
• Kris Bankston: Exceptional athlete. Will make some ridiculous plays on both ends. Really good finisher
looking to dunk everything. Blocks shots and can move his feet on the perimeter. Lacks a lot of skill and
touch.
• Dana Tate: Forward with some versatility. Plays a lot on the inside but can step out and make some
open shots. Good role player.
• Tyrese Jenkins: Limited offensive player that can make some open shots. Good athlete and can make
some plays defensively.
• Christian Ings: Guard off the bench, can handle the ball and is a solid playmaker. Capable of scoring as
well but has been inefficient. Not much of a shooter but can hit open ones. Not a great defender.
• Daryl Anderson: Athletic wing, limited offensive role to spot up shooting. Versatile defender, can
switch on multiple positions really well.
• Nyzaiah Chambers: Backup center, solid athlete and good motor. Undersized for his position.
Scheme
• Will play a lot in transition
• Offense is mostly through sets, Bryant and Hawkins can play out of them
• Can do some switching defensively or will play at the level of ball screens
• Will heavily bring help in the gaps on drives
Strengths
• They have a dynamic guard duo of Bryant and Hawkins that are both talented three-
level scorers and capable shot makers
• Defensive versatility is a plus. They can switch with their athleticism, but also defend
well when playing at the level of ball screens. Bankston’s athleticism opens up a lot for
them, and they have solid size and athleticism at other spots to execute.
• They do a good job of attacking off the dribble, guards draw a lot of fouls
• They are an athletic team for a mid-major
• They do a good job of keeping opposing players out of the lane defensively. They
execute their scheme well and mostly have good point of attack defenders.
• They really push the ball in transition. The three guards in Bryant, Hawkins, and Ings
score a lot of points by pushing the pace
• They are not a great shooting team, but they do attack closeouts well
• They run some creative sets offensively to allow Bryant to create offense or get good
looks
• They generally do a good job of providing help and getting back out to shooters or
rotating
Weaknesses
• They could have better playmaking offensively. Bryant and Hawkins are more looking
to score than facilitate.
• Their scheme gives up a ton of looks from deep for opponents. Better teams will be
able to capitalize more often against them.
• They are not a great shooting team. They have plenty of players that can be helped off
of and their highest volume shooters don’t shoot the ball very well.
• They have good size for a mid-major, but maybe not so much for competing with high-
majors
• They will run a decent amount of stuff out of ball screens, but struggle to generate
offense out of that
• They are good at getting to the rim, but could be better at finishing
• They struggle with ball pressure
Evaluation
Norfolk State rolled through the MEAC all season long to get to the NCAA Tournament. They have a
dynamic guard duo in Joe Bryant and Jalen Hawkins that opens up their offense. They can create shots
and score at all three levels. Christian Ings can do a lot of similar stuff off the bench. Defensively is
where this team has made their reputation. They are versatile with a really athletic center in Kris
Bankston. He allows them to do a lot of switching, and he executes their scheme really well with his
speed and short area quickness. The general athleticism of the other players also allows them to execute
their scheme really well. This has been a good team that has really outperformed expectations but
scaling to playing in the tournament is going to be an issue for them. Offensively, I’m not sure how much
they will score with the lack of high-level playmaking and real lack of shooting. The lack of 3-point
shooting or even willingness to take 3s is what limits their ability to pull off an upset. Defensively, this
team gives up a ridiculous amount of 3s to execute their scheme. While that may work in the MEAC,
that is going to cause a lot of problems against the best teams in the country. They are also a little
undersized. It would be shocking to see Norfolk State escape a round 1 matchup.
12.64. Cal State Fullerton
Depth Chart
Coach: Dedrique Taylor
PG: Damari Milstead | Guard | 6’2” B1: Tray Maddox Jr. | Wing | 6’6”
SG: Latrell Wrightsell | Guard | 6’3” B2: Jalen Harris | Guard | 6’1”
SF: Tory San Antonio | Guard | 6’3” B3: Dante Maddox | Guard | 6’2”
PF: Vincent Lee | Forward | 6’8” B4: Lado Laku | Big | 6’10”
C: E.J. Anosike | Big | 6’7” B5: Ibrahim Famouke Doumbia | Forward | 6’7”
Player Stats

• E.J. Anosike: Big, strong forward that they run a lot of offense through. Undersized but very strong,
scores a lot out of the post. Good face up game. Will make basic passing reads out of there. Very good
rebounder, not a bad athlete for his size. Can shoot open shots, but that isn’t his strength.
• Damari Milstead: High usage ball handler, aggressive shooter from deep. He has a little bit of a hitch
but has shot the ball well. Good slasher and playmaker. Good on-ball defender.
• Tray Maddox Jr.: Really good scorer off the bench. Athletic slasher that can hit catch and shoot
jumpers. Good perimeter defender.
• Jalen Harris: Small guard that does a lot offensively off the bench. Can create his own shot at the rim.
Works well in transition.
• Vincent Lee: Big forward, more of a traditional big in the starting lineup than Anosike. Good
rebounder, not a great athlete. Not a great offensive player, limited to play finishing.
• Latrell Wrightsell: Solid shot creator but has not been efficient this season. Has struggled to finish on
the interior, does have some midrange game. Solid athlete with decent size. Not much of a shooter.
• Tory San Antonio: Really good role player. Defends the other team’s best player, has a high motor and
is a solid athlete. Really good rebounder. Very limited on offense and not a shooter.
Scheme
• They will bring heavy help on drives, collapse on players in the paint
• Drop coverage on ball screens, will ice side ball screens
• Mostly play out of 4 out and 3 out looks, some sets designed to get guards downhill or
get the ball to Anosike
Strengths
• Very much a drive and kick oriented team. They are best offensively with the guards
that can get downhill by attacking the gaps.
• Anosike is a unique matchup for a lot of teams with his ability to use his strength in
the post combined with the face up game
• They do a very good job of attacking the rim offensively. They get good looks there
and draw a lot of fouls from opponents that way.
• They are made up of a lot of good point of attack defenders, they have a lot of activity
• They are good within their defensive scheme of not allowing shots in the paint, they
really collapse on drives and don’t let the ball go middle
• They will push the ball in transition and are effective with their speed
• They are smaller, which allows them to be quick on the perimeter
• They do a solid job within their pick and roll coverages, especially with the ice
coverage on side ball screens
Weaknesses
• They are very undersized and don’t have a lot of athleticism in the frontcourt
• Shooting is a major concern for this group, especially considering how much they drive
and kick offensively. Low volume shooting team with only a couple of threats.
• Anosike may not perform as well against bigger teams; he is only 6’7”. I’m not sure if
he will draw doubles against high-major programs.
• The combination of the guards being able to make some reads on drives is solid, but
they don’t have any guard that can really drive efficient offense
• They lack depth, only two players right now come off the bench and contribute
• The defensive scheme gives up a lot of very good looks from deep
• They struggle to generate good offense out of ball screens
• Post defense is going to be an issue against better team with the lack of size
Evaluation
Cal State Fullerton has qualified for the NCAA Tournament after making it out of the Big West. They are
a solid team on both ends of the floor. Offensively, they play a lot through E.J. Anosike. He is a smaller
forward with a really strong frame. Despite him being a little undersized for how he plays, he is a solid
athlete and has skill. He can back down smaller players in the post but is also capable of facing up and
scoring against slower players. Around him are generally three guards that can attack the rim really well
and spray out to the perimeter on drives. They also score effectively in transition when they get the
chance. They have a good offensive system. Defensively, they play no-middle fairly well. It’s tough to get
shots at the rim against them, as they have quick point of attack defenders and some movement ability
in the frontcourt. They will heavily collapse on drives. This is a solid team, but they will need a lot of luck
to advance past the first round in the tourney. They lack shooting, and Anosike won’t be as effective
against some of the better college basketball teams. They don’t have enough size for their defensive
scheme to work as well against better teams either. They also give up a lot of easy looks from deep,
which will kill them against a lot of high-majors. The lack of shooting limits the upside here for me, but
the guard play makes almost makes them interesting. Anything can happen in college basketball, and for
something to happen for Cal State Fullerton they will need a ton of opponent shooting luck in the first
round.
12.65. Delaware
Depth Chart
Coach: Martin Ingelsby
PG: Jameer Nelson Jr. | Guard | 6’1” B1: Ryan Allen | Guard | 6’2”
SG: Ebby Asamoah | Guard | 6’4” B2: Dylan Painter | Big | 6’10”
SF: Kevin Anderson | Guard | 6’5” B3: Gianmarco Arletti | Wing | 6’6”
PF: Jyare Davis | Forward | 6’7” B4: Reggie Gardner | Guard | 6’3”
C: Andrew Carr | Forward | 6’9” B5: Wes Peterson | Guard | 6’6”
Player Stats

• Jameer Nelson Jr.: Athletic guard looking to score the ball. Aggressive shooter off the dribble and can
get some paint touches. Uses ball screens well, not a great playmaker but capable.
• Kevin Anderson: Guard with some size, best playmaker on the team. Uses pick and roll a lot. Also a
good shooter and solid athlete.
• Jyare Davis: Athletic 4 that is mostly used in the post. Has good strength and uses it well to leverage
advantages in there. Undersized and not a shooter. Versatile defensively.
• Ebby Asamoah: 3 and D wing. Good athlete and really good defender. Has size and length. Can be a
little over aggressive offensively for his skill level.
• Dylan Painter: Backup big man who plays a lot of minutes. Heavy usage in the post, good post player.
Has good touch on the inside. Can also use his size well to protect the rim and grab a lot of offensive
rebounds.
• Ryan Allen: High-usage lefty guard off the bench. Very aggressive shooter but can also attack the rim
some. Used a lot in ball screens. Plays a ton of minutes despite coming off the bench.
• Andrew Carr: Starting center but doesn’t play a ton of minutes. Has good size and is a good athlete for
his size. A little skinny for a center. Good post player.
Scheme
• Ball screen heavy team, can run their version of continuity ball screen or sets, a lot
of empty side actions. Mostly either 3 out or 4 out.
• Pack line defense
Strengths
• They run a ball screen heavy offense with a lot of different guards that can run them in
Nelson, Anderson, and Allen.
• All of Nelson, Anderson, and Allen can generate paint touches. There are solid athletes
that can handle the ball and get downhill.
• As a team they score well in the paint. The guards can get there, but they also have
three post players that score well around the rim.
• They have solid shooting around their actions, they get a lot of good looks from deep
on kickouts
• They score really well in the post. They have actions that get them post touches and
exploit matchups down the well.
• They are solid in execution of their pick and roll coverage. Teams at in their conference
were not able to score as well against the drop coverage.
• Carr and Painter both have size and are solid rim protectors
• Their style of play leads to a lot of free throws
• They have a lot of plus athletes on their team and good size for a mid-major
Weaknesses
• Really poor rebounding team on both ends of the floor
• They lack a primary playmaker. Their guards are much more looking to score when
coming off ball screens. They struggle to hit the roll man, making their pick and roll
attack much less dynamic than it could be.
• They have almost no depth. They only play two players off the bench.
• They do not attempt a ton of shots from deep
• They could look to score much more in transition with their personnel
• They allow a ton of shots in the paint despite their defensive scheme. The point of
attack defense is not great with a lot of breakdowns.
• They utilize the post a lot, but I don’t think their post players will scale against bigger
and more athletic teams
• They don’t defend well in the post at all. Their big men are too small or too skinny.
Evaluation
After losing their last 3 conference games and dropping to the 5 seed in the CAA tournament, Delaware
was able to win 3 games in their tournament to qualify for March Madness. This team is likely going to
be overmatched in a round 1 matchup with a highly seeded team. They run a lot of actions using ball
screens, and I especially like their empty side looks. They have multiple guards that can come off of
screens looking to score. However, they really lack someone that can manipulate the defense and make
plays for others. They struggle to hit the roll man on their actions. Delaware has done a good job in
league play utilizing the post to take advantage of their personnel. They are relatively big for a mid-
major and can mash smaller teams in the post. The issue is that I don’t think this can scale to better
teams in the tournament. Their best post players are either 6’7” or fairly skinny with better size. I don’t
think they will be very effective against the monsters that play high-major basketball. Defensively they
also have issues. They allow a ton of shots around the rim but have gotten away with it so far with
decent rim protection. That won’t be nearly as effective against better competition. I struggle to see
how this Delaware team can compete in the first round without some fantastic shooting luck.
12.66. Yale
Depth Chart
Coach: James Jones
PG: Azar Swain | Guard | 6’2” B1: Matthue Cotton | Guard | 6’5”
SG: Bez Mbeng | Guard | 6’4” B2: Ed Jarvis | Forward | 6’8”
SF: Jalen Gabbidon | Guard | 6’5” B3: August Mahoney | Guard | 6’4”
PF: Matt Knowling | Forward | 6’5” B4: John Poulakidas | Guard | 6’5”
C: Isaiah Kelly | Forward | 6’7” B5: Jack Molloy | Forward | 6’8”
Player Stats

• Azar Swain: Really good shot making guard. Three level scorer, can hit some ridiculous pull ups in the
midrange. Also a great shooter. Initiates a lot of offense but is not much of a playmaker. Solid athlete,
but he is undersized for his role.
• Jalen Gabbidon: Bigger guard that can slash. Gets a lot at the rim driving from the perimeter, also a
good cutter. Draws a lot of fouls on drives. He’s a capable shooter, but not too reliable. Can have tunnel
vision when he puts the ball on the deck. Pretty good defender.
• Matt Knowling: Lefty forward that has really good touch on floaters and can get to the rim. Really
good in the post, also used well as a roll man. Not a shooter at all. Good defensive player with some
versatility.
• Matthue Cotton: Athletic guard with size off the bench. Aggressive shooter, but results from deep
have not been there this season. Doesn’t do a great job of attacking closeouts. Limited ball handler.
Good defensive player with some versatility.
• Isaiah Kelly: Athletic starting center. Protects the rim well for his size, smart with his positioning.
Limited offensive roll to setting screens, not much of a threat on that end.
• Bez Mbeng: Has gotten more minutes as the season has gone along, good defender with some length
and athleticism. Limited as an offensive player.
• Ed Jarvis: Athletic backup center. Solid defender that protects the rim well. Really good rebounder.
Lacks touch on finishes.
• August Mahoney: Mostly used as a shooter in a limited role. Struggles when he is asked to put the ball
on the floor.
Scheme
• Motion based offense with some continuity ball screen, can also go to some 5 out
delay and different sets
• More of a pack line defensively, they don’t bring a ton of help on drives
Strengths
• Swain’s shot making ability can keep them in games offensively. He can make some
ridiculous shots from all over the court.
• They are good at the point of attack defensively. Mbeng and Gabbidon is a fairly good
wing duo defensively.
• They do a good job of running through their offense. They run good stuff with a lot of
player movement and screening with optimal spacing, a lot of empty side actions.
• They contest shots from the perimeter well. They have some length and avoid
overhelping on drives.
• They score well out of the post, mostly attacking mismatches with Knowling
• They have done a good job of containing ball screens with their coverages. They make
it difficult to hit the roller with their drop coverage, force tougher midrange shots.
• They don’t allow opponents to get much in transition, they don’t go for offensive
rebounds to prevent anything in transition
• They do a solid job of generally forcing tougher shots in the midrange with their
scheme
Weaknesses
• They are going to be at a major size deficit against high-major teams. Their starting 5 is
6’7” and their backup is 6’8”.
• They are comfortable with players going at their big men within their scheme, but
against better teams that is going to lead to trouble with their size
• They trust their perimeter defenders to guard individuals on the perimeter, which may
not be as effective against better teams
• Outside of Swain, they are not good at shooting. They play a lot of players that aren’t
threats from out there at all, can really clog up their offense.
• They are not good at generating a ton of paint touches offensively. They often will
settle for tough shots.
• They run a lot of ball screens that don’t necessarily lead to good offense with the lack
of shooting on the perimeter and undersized centers
• Post ups likely will not be as effective against better competition
• Defending against post ups will be a struggle for them against better teams
Evaluation
After the upset of Princeton in the Ivy league championship game, Yale has earned its spot in the
tournament. They made their way in through the defensive side of the ball combined with some tough
shot making and well-designed offense. They have some good perimeter defenders along with versatile
centers that can also protect the rim. They do a good job within their system, not overhelping but
providing enough to help the big men. They trust their defenders to contain on the perimeter.
Offensively, they run a lot of good stuff with spacing and motion. What makes it work is Azar Swain. He
is a ridiculous shot maker who has kept them in a lot of games. His shot making alone makes this offense
a lot better, as they don’t have a ton of talent on that end. Ultimately, I don’t think this team scales well.
They have a defensive scheme and pick and roll coverage that could be flammable when playing better
teams. Offensively, I’m not sure who can have much success outside of Swain. Their best chance would
be for Swain to make some ridiculous shots and hope for opponent misses. I don’t see it happening
without a ton of luck.
12.67. Wright State
Depth Chart
Coach: Scott Nagy
PG: Trey Calvin | Guard | 6’0” B1: Keaton Norris | Guard | 5’11”
SG: Tanner Holden | Wing | 6’6” B2: Andrew Welage | Wing | 6’6”
SF: Tim Finke | Wing | 6’6” B3: C.J. Wilbourn | Forward | 6’7”
PF: Grant Basile | Forward | 6’9” B4: Riley Voss | Forward | 6’6”
C: AJ Braun | Big | 6’9” B5: Andy Neff | Forward | 6’7”
Player Stats

• Grant Basile: Versatile offensive forward. Can shoot, handle the ball, and post up. Solid passer as well.
Decent athlete, can play some backup 5. Not as great of a run and jump athlete.
• Tanner Holden: Athletic wing that can slash well. Can get to the rim and really finish. Draws a lot of
fouls. Handles the ball well, really effective in transition. Not the greatest shot creator but plays really
well within their offense.
• Trey Calvin: Small guard, can get some looks in the paint off the dribble. High usage in ball screens,
good shooter. Size can be an issue for him defensively. Solid but not great as a playmaker.
• Tim Finke: High volume shooter. Can move well without the ball. Has not particularly shot the bal ell
this season. Has good size for his role, but is a wing that can’t guard wings.
• AJ Braun: Starting 5, can make some reads out of the post. Good hands and solid footwork. Struggles
to finish around the rim. Not a very good post player. Has size but not great defensively.
• Keaton Norris: Small backup point guard, really good shooter. Has very deep range on the shot, can
use his shooting gravity to create other looks. Very undersized, can struggle with ball pressure.
• Andrew Welage: Forward off the bench, limited role offensively to spot up shooting. Has solid
positional size.
Scheme
• Drop coverage against ball screens, will ice some going towards to middle
• They play within a lot of motion concepts on offense, a lot of 4 out with ball
movement and cutting
• More of a pack line defensively with where they direct the ball, will not bring heavy
help into the gaps
Strengths
• Basile can create some issues for other teams from a matchup perspective. The
combination of size, shooting, post ups, and ball handling makes it tough to defend.
• They are a good offensive rebounding team, attacking the glass with their big men and
wings
• They do a solid job of spacing the floor and creating angles for cuts
• They are a good passing team overall. No one is particularly a ball stopper.
• They prevent opponent 3s with their scheme
• They score well in transition. They juice the pace of the game, and Holden and Calvin
get a ton of points by leaking out and running the floor.
• They use the post well with their two big men. They can also make some nice passing
reads out of the post.
• They are effective in their spread ball screen looks when Calvin or Holden is handling
the ball and Basile is used as the screener
• They have good size for a mid-major
Weaknesses
• They really struggle on the defensive glass
• This team lacks a lot of athleticism across the board
• Overall shooting is an issue. I wish they shot the ball a lot better for their style of play,
a lot of their highest volume shooting threats are not actually shooting good
percentages.
• Their offense doesn’t generate much from players creating their own outside of Basile.
Basile can be managed by bigger and more athletic players.
• They will give up a decent amount of opponent looks around the rim and don’t have
great rim protection
• Post ups are a large part of their offense that likely will not translate as well against
better competition
• Their drop coverage is not great, they allow the ball handler to get too deep against
centers that are not good enough for that coverage
• Defending in the post will be a major issue for them
• Their overall defense at the point of attack is weak
Evaluation
Wright State qualifies for the NCAA tournament after winning the Horizon League as the 4 seed in that
tournament. This is a team I struggle to see competing in a first-round game. They are primarily an
offensive minded team, using cutting and movement to generate good looks. They are also efficient in
transition and have a player in Basile that hurts mid-major teams. However, I don’t see their offensive
system working as well against better teams. Basile is someone who’s game likely won’t translate as well
when playing against more size and athleticism. They don’t have enough shooting to optimize the way
they play. The overall self-creation from the perimeter leaves some to be desired. Defensively, this team
is weak. They don’t have great defense at the point of attack, and they can be scored on a decent
amount at the rim. Overall, this is not a very athletic team. Their best chance of winning a game would
be having enough missed opponent shots that they can get out in transition a ton while also hitting a
bunch of shots themselves. I would be shocked to see this team in the second round.
12.68. Texas A&M-Corpus Christi
Depth Chart
Coach: Steve Lutz
PG: Jalen Jackson | Guard | 5’11” B1: Trey Tennyson | Guard | 6’4”
SG: Terrion Murdix | Guard | 6’1” B2: Myles Smith | Guard | 6’0”
SF: Simeon Fryer | Wing | 6’5” B3: San Antonio Brinson | Forward | 6’8”
PF: Isaac Mushila | Forward | 6’5” B4: Tyrese Nickelson | Guard | 6’2”
C: De’Lazarus Keys | Big | 6’8” B5: Stephan Faramade | Big | 6’9”
Player Stats

• Isaac Mushila: Athletic forward, good slasher that can really get to the rim. Draws a good number of
fouls. Not a bad passer. Really good rebounder. Good player in the post. Versatile defender.
• Terrion Murdix: Good two-way player. Can initiate offense in ball screens, can get downhill out of
them. Really good playmaker as well. Good defender who’s active in passing lane and on digs. Not a
shooter.
• Simeon Fryer: Best shot maker on the team. Can hit shots from 3 and has some ability to pull up in the
midrange. Not a playmaker and the efficiency is inconsistent. Fits well within their defensive system.
• De’Lazarus Keys: High motor starting center. Really good rebounder and good athlete. Has some
defensive versatility. Not a rim protector, undersized as a center. Not good in the post.
• Trey Tennyson: Three-level scorer, might be the best shot creator on the team. One of their better
shooters, will come off the bench and generate a lot of offense.
• Myles Smith: Smaller guard off the bench that can shoot and defend at the point of attack. Not used a
ton as a ball handler.
• Jalen Jackson: Unique as a small guard that doesn’t provide a ton offensively. Not much of a shooter
and struggles to finish on the interior. Decent playmaker. Good defender at his size.
• San Antonio Brinson: Bigger forward off the bench. Solid athlete, has some defensive versatility. Not
much of a shooter.
Scheme
• They are aggressive in the passing lanes, denials from one pass away
• Will ice side ball screens, can switch or play at the level of high ball screens
• They will really look to push the pace
Strengths
• They do a great job in execution of their defensive scheme. It’s very tough to get paint
touches against them.
• A lot of strength and versatility in their point of attack defense. They are aggressive
and they contain the ball well.
• They play really aggressively in passing lanes and force a lot of turnovers
• Mushila and Keys do a really good job of crashing the offensive glass
• They really push the ball, capitalizing off of the turnovers they force. It’s how they
generate a lot of their offense.
• They have a lot of pieces that fit into their system off the bench
• They are an aggressive team overall, they draw a lot of fouls
• They really attack the rim on offense
• They have some decent defensive versatility with their frontcourt pieces
• They do a good job in ball screen coverages, making it tough for the ball handler to go
anywhere against their more aggressive coverages
• They have some interior strength that has defended well in the post
Weaknesses
• They really struggle to create any offense in the half-court. They lack shot creation and
playmaking talent in that regard.
• They have very little shooting. They are a low volume and low efficiency team, only
have a couple of players that are a threat to shoot from out there.
• Reliant on transition to generate any offense
• They really lack size, they might be overwhelmed against better teams
• They foul a ton with their defensive aggression
• They are a very high turnover team
• Their defensive scheme gives up a ton of shots from 3
• They don’t have very good rim protection with the lack of size
• They can struggle on the defensive glass
• They are not good at finishing on the interior
• They struggle to score anything in ball screens or in the post
Evaluation
After winning the Southland Tournament as a 4 seed, Texas A&M-Corpus Christi has qualified for the
NCAA Tournament. They have made the tournament with their strength on defense. They play an
aggressive style, pressuring the ball and denying passes all over the floor. They will prevent players from
getting to the middle of the floor, and they have the versatile big men to execute this coverage. They
force a lot of turnovers with their pressure, which allows them to get out in transition and generate
some offense. They are a low seeded team for a reason. Their halfcourt offense is difficult to watch.
There is not a ton of ball or player movement, and they really struggle to generate good looks. They
have a massive lack of shooting, which makes it very easy for opposing teams to contest everything at
the rim. They need to get out in transition to have any kind of offensive success. Defensively, they lack
size and don’t have much rim protection. They will struggle against better perimeter players that can
handle their pressure. I find it hard to see how this team can win a first-round game in the tournament.
They are too small, don’t have shooting, and struggle to generate offense. The only hope would be to
force turnovers and have opponents miss shots. It’s difficult to see that happening.

2022 Guide To March Madness

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2022 Guide To March Madness

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Introduction

Tier 1: Championship favorites

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations

Quick Player Evaluations