(With non-conference schedule nearly complete, it's a good time to take stock at where things stand in the Big Ten)

Josh: I know we both predicted that big things were coming for this conference, I really didn't expect the B1G TEN to suddenly become the best conference in the nation, but that's precisely what's happened.  And with only a handful more of lose-able non-conference games remaining, that isn't likely to change.  There aren't a lot of crowns you can bestow in December, but this is one of them.  So take a bow, Big Ten.  I'll leave you to the more difficult part, Mike--how did it happen?
 
Mike: I think the Big Ten's excellence this season is, at least partly, the culmination of that landmark 2007 recruiting class reaching its final season. There were so many great players in that class, and the Big Ten, for the most part, has avoided the NBA defections and attrition that have removed about a third of that year's RSCI top 100 from college basketball. There are still nine members of that top 100 that are playing in the Big Ten right now, and that list includes some of the conference's most important players (Jon Leuer, E'Twaun Moore, JaJuan Johnson, Demetri McCamey, Kalin Lucas). If we include 2006 top 100 player David Lighty, that's 10 Big Ten seniors that were top 100 recruits coming out of high school. For some comparison, the 2010 Big Ten class, which is quite strong in its own right, has 12 top 100 players, so to end up with 10 of these guys as seniors is certainly a luxury. It seems that Big Ten coaches found a happy balance in that 2007 class: ultra-productive college players that don't bolt early for the NBA.
 
It also helps that the bottom of the conference is really shoring things up. In recent seasons, the Big Ten has usually had at least one team that was really bad (outside of Pomeroy's top 150), dragging down the conference average. This year, the bottom four consists of a resurgent Indiana, an experienced Penn State, and surprisingly solid defensive teams in Michigan and Iowa. As it stands today, Iowa at #77 is the Big Ten's worst team by Pomeroy rating, which is light-years ahead of where the Big Ten's cellar usually resides.

We've taken a little flack for our belief in Wisconsin--what do you make of their performance thus far? Are they a Big Ten title contender like we predicted, or are they not even worthy of a top 25 ranking (as the coaches and media apparently believe)?

Josh: "Flak?"  It's even worse than that!  We're being accused of being Wisconsin fans!  What in the name of Jack Ingram is going on here?!?

I understand where people were coming from on the Badgers, I really do.  I mean, if you were to take a national analysts' amount of time to look at the roster before the season began you'd see precisely one player who had ever handled the basketball for an extended period of time, and conclude that's a very big problem in high-major basketball.  But all the all the Badgers have done is take advantage of the sudden size (offensive rebounding is way, way up in Madison) without sacrificing turnovers.  It's a tough trick to pull off, but frankly, the next time Bo's team has a turnover rate outside the neighborhood of "tiny" will be his first (OK, that's not true--2008 was more like "small").  And it also doesn't hurt to have Jon Leuer on the team.  Speaking of Leuer, I'm just in shock over the lack of pub this guy gets.  If the season ended today, your NPOY ballot would have three names: Kemba Walker, Derrick Williams, and Mr. Leuer.  Full stop.

So to answer your question, I think that Wisconsin is absolutely in the title hunt.  Disrespect them at your own peril.  

Now, the other big contender at this point looks like Ohio State.  Road wins at Florida and Florida State are nice, but the bigger story is that the Buckeyes haven't even been challenged all that much.  The closest game was an 11 point win.  Now, it's not hard to see why this team is good--a mix of 4-star veterans and 5-star freshmen will serve you well--but there is a mystery on this team.  Namely, DeShaun Thomas.  Thad Matta apparently doesn't trust his defense enough to play him in anything but blowouts, and as a result, Thomas has some eye-popping offensive stats.  But how much can great performances against cupcakes tell us?  How good is this guy, really?

Also, what do you make of John Beilein's sudden defensive genius?  Is there any way this could last?

Mike: Deshaun Thomas certainly has the pedigree to be an outstanding college player (#17 RSCI, McDonald's All-American), but you're right, Matta apparently doesn't trust him in close games yet. I can understand this - if you've got a well-oiled machine out there, why throw a chucker into it to see what happens? Ohio State has been elite at both ends, so he's obviously doing something right. I do think that Thomas will have some big moments as the year wears on, especially when the Buckeyes find themselves struggling to score. Perhaps Matta could go offense-for-defense all game long with Thomas and Dallas Lauderdale?

I just wrote a recap the other day talking about Michigan's suddenly strong defense. The interesting thing is just how different the Wolverine defense is from a season ago. Gone are the forced turnovers, but they've been replaced by excellent defensive rebounding. Gone is the permissive two-point defense. We'll get a nice barometer of Michigan's defense this Saturday as they host Oakland, a great offensive rebounding team that has a top 30 offense. I don't see any reason to doubt that Michigan's defense is legit, but time will tell.

Speaking of defense, do you think Northwestern can play enough of it to reach the NCAA Tournament?

Josh: They can play all the defense they want, but those dancing shoes are going to stay in the closet.  Even if there is a defensive turnaround of sorts (and the numbers suggest there hasn't been one), the Wildcats do not have a very challenging non-conference schedule.  I'm as anti-RPI as they come, but I won't deny its place as the bubble's arbiter.  And look at the RPIs of NU's non-conference foes: 310, 312, 285, 152, 170, 179, 158, 168, 270, 334.  Now, it's possible that Georgia Tech and/or Creighton see their numbers rise as we head into the conference season, but I doubt they suddenly become top 50 teams.  This means that the only "good" wins that Northwestern is likely to have this season are going to come in conference play.  Basically, it's set up such that the Wildcats have to go 11-7 (10-8 might do it, but they'll be sweating) in the conference in order to go dancing.  And for that to happen, well, we're talking about a big defensive turnaround.  You hate seeing the die cast so early, least of all because John Shurna deserves more limelight, but I just can't see any other outcome.  

And what about Minnesota?  Is Tubby developing a knack for scoring big non-conference wins alongside panic-button-inducing losses?  Last year they took down Butler before getting upended by Portland--this year they beat UNC and West Virginia before what seemed to be a bad loss to Virginia (although the Cavs might end up making that loss sort of OK).

 
Mike: I will say that Minnesota has surprised me at the offensive end - I wrote in my preview that they had nobody returning that wanted a hearty shot diet, but Blake Hoffarber and Ralph Sampson have jumped into that void with flying colors. Also, Trevor Mbakwe has made a much bigger impact than I expected, both with his rebounding and his offense. Amazingly, the Minnesota offense hasn't missed a beat without Lawrence Westbrook.

The loss to Virginia was a strange one, in that the Gophers dominated the first half and then gave up 58 points after the break. Al Nolen's absence can explain some of that poor defense, but it still looks like one of those weird outliers that college basketball can deliver. And as you said, Virginia isn't looking as doormatty as they originally appeared. Minnesota should finish nonconference play with an 11-1 mark, and you'd think scraping together 9 Big Ten wins (no easy task, that) would then be enough for an at-large bid. On a side note, how silly does that Rodney Williams first-round 2011 draft pick talk look now?

How about another area where we've drawn fans' ire - is Purdue really a top 15 team like Pomeroy says?

Josh: Hoo-boy.  Well, in all honesty I think the jury is still out (but, it's still out for everyone).  The Purdue optimist points to the Pomeroy Rating, the cynic points to the fact that there's really one (maybe two now, with Oakland's win over Tennessee) quality win on the schedule.  I'm starting to have doubts about that prediction, but I'm not abandoning it yet.  Unsurprisingly, Purdue is winning with defense.  It's the formula that worked for them last year post-Robbie, and it's the script Painter has gone with this season.  Although Moore and Johnson are playing very well, the supporting cast just isn't good enough to make this an explosive offense.  Right now it's the Big Ten's 7th best offense per efficiency ratings.  

The defensive side is intriguing, however.  The Boilers are forcing a lot of turnovers, but frankly that's nothing new for them--Painter's teams almost always force a lot of turnovers in the non-conference portion of the schedule.  The more interesting story is what's happening beyond the arc, where opponents are shooting a paltry 25 percent.  Now, there's research that suggests that opponent three point percentage isn't entirely within the defense's control (i.e., it's "luck").  That's what Team Cynic would say, that Purdue is getting lucky.  Don't worry though, because I have some ammo for Team Optimist too.  If you look at the other opponent three point statistic, 3PA/FGA, you'll see that opponents do not like attempting threes against Purdue, either.  And there have been teams that discourage not only three point attempts, but also three point makes (and all the while creating a bunch of opponent turnovers), and they do this on a consistent basis, suggesting this isn't just fate smiling upon them.  In fact, there's one very prominent team that has a 20 year or so history of doing this--its name begins with a "D" and rhymes with "Puke."  This may indeed be the key to interpreting Purdue.  I'll be looking to see if the Boilermakers are employing an overplay defense and taking charges the next few times they take the court.  If so, let's agree to brand E'Twaun Moore as the conference's reigning J.J. Redick and slap some floor.  If not, well, this may be a mirage.  

OK, now you take on another eyebrow-raising prediction we had--is there any reason to revise our relatively bearish outlook on the Spartans?  And sure, the Hawkeyes are faster, but are they any better?

(Tomorrow we'll go over the rest of the conference and take a look at some of the surprising breakout performers)