(continuing our discussion from yesterday)

Mike: I think we're looking good on our Michigan State prediction (12-6). In fact, Pomeroy's ratings now project the Spartans to go 11-7 in conference play, so I think we were pretty spot-on with our doubts about Michigan State being a top 10 team. There are two things about MSU's early play that have surprised me.

First is the rebounding, or lack thereof. Don't get me wrong, the Spartans haven't been terrible on the glass, but there's been a big dropoff from last season. Raymar Morgan was a good rebounder, but so are the guys available to take his minutes. I expect the rebounding numbers to improve as the season goes on.

The other surprise is Michigan State's three-point shooting. Not only are they taking a lot more threes, but they're making a lot too (39.9 percent). We expected this to be a weakness for the Spartans, what with Chris Allen transferring and the returnees not sporting great numbers last season, but almost to a man, the Spartans are hitting threes at much higher rates. Kalin Lucas has gone from 35 to 43 percent; Durrell Summers has gone from 36 to 42 percent; Draymond Green has gone from 13 to 52 percent. Heck, freshman Keith Appling is hitting 48 percent on threes. As a team, I don't think this kind of accuracy is sustainable.

So, the dropping three-point percentage should offset the improved rebounding, and I think we end up with a Michigan State team that's about as good as they've been so far: top 20, but maybe fourth-best in the Big Ten. That's nothing to be ashamed of, and I have no doubt the Spartans will be dangerous in March, but it's a far cry from a preseason #2 ranking.

As for Iowa, it's ironic that the coach brought in to deploy a more entertaining brand of basketball (i.e. more points) has significantly improved the defense and done almost nothing for the offense. To be fair, Fran McCaffery can't be expected to change the DNA of the team completely overnight, and he has indeed upped the tempo in Iowa City. But color me unconvinced of Iowa's defensive improvement. McCaffery never put a top 50 defense on the floor at Siena, and he's working with guys that either are new to the college game or were big parts of last year's terrible Iowa defense. Some of that element of "luck" you mentioned might be in play here - Iowa's opponents have bombed away from three, but they've only made 30 percent. I don't see that continuing, but McCaffery still deserves kudos for making Iowa more competitive right out of the gate. He'll need time to fully implement his style there.

How about Illinois? Their highly regarded freshmen haven't made a huge impact, yet they're 10-1 and on the cusp of Pomeroy's top 10. Do they look like a serious Big Ten title contender to you?

Josh: Both the offense and the defense are certainly cooking for Illinois.  Regarding the defense, it appears the Illini have traded defensive rebounding for getting more turnovers (as well as tightening up the field goal defense), and it's paying off for them.  And there's little reason to doubt it's for real, as a good defense under Weber is the norm.

Regarding offense, there's more reason for worry here.  Low turnovers, not a lot of free throws or offensive rebounds, low block numbers on offense...this all sounds like jumpshots.  And the relatively 3PA/FGA means that we're probably talking about two pointers.  This all adds up to the dreaded mid-range offense.  And I know we both have doubts about how far a mid-range offense can go.  Really, the difference for the Illini this season is that they're shooting better.  And hey, nothing wrong with that.  In fact, there's a really positive spin to be had on this--despite running one of the least efficient (in concept) offenses out there, the Illini still have the 16th best adjusted offensive efficiency in the country.  Just imagine what they can do when they snap out of it and start taking more threes!

Realistically though, I don't see that happening.  With a steady mid-range diet, that offense will start to slip in conference play.  The question is whether the defense can hold firm and make up for it.  Illinois is headed for a nice season, but it still feels like this group is capable of more.  

(This was written prior to the shocker in Chicago. True story.)

And not that you asked, but I want to talk about Indiana.  Now, the Hoosiers haven't actually beaten anyone of note, and the only two times they played high-major teams, they lost by double digits, but Pomeroy sees a lot of improvement here.  And frankly, so do I.  Sure, BC and Kentucky ended up winning by a lot, but those games were competitive until late in the 2nd half.  And hey--look at that Christian Watford.  Boy, whoever picked him as a breakout candidate must be patting himself on the back now!  

Coming into the season, I thought the goal for IU should have been a .500 overall record and getting to a postseason tournament.  And I think they can do both, which is pretty remarkable considering the ugly conference efficiency margin they posted last season.  The journey back from Sampson's Implosion kind of reminds me of a familiar video game.  I'm a big fan of the BioWare stuff (Mass Effect is one popular title), and the formula for those games is pretty simple.  Start with a very weak and lonely character, get some experience, find some friends to join you, and slowly get stronger until you have 50 separate ways to destroy enemies with little effort.  In a way, I think that's the situation Tom Crean inherited.  The whole team basically left after the scandal, so he started off alone.  He's added new pieces with each recruiting class, and he's now got a team that, while inexperienced, isn't "one of the most inexperienced teams in Division I."  And bit-by-bit, Indiana is getting stronger.  In 2008-09, the Hoosiers were awful at everything.  Last year, they started getting to the free throw line and grabbing offensive rebounds.  This year, they're no longer getting dunked on at a frantic pace--now blocking shots, in fact--and the only real outstanding issues to address are 1) stop giving the ball away like it's Halloween candy, and 2) stop fouling every opponent that looks at you funny.  That's it.  By my count, I put the IU's return to the Dance in 2012.  Disagree?

OK, talk to me about Penn State, where there's been a similar "turnovers for defensive rebounds" trade.  

Mike: I'm with you on IU - they should have a realistic shot at the NCAA Tournament next season, and they should be even better after that. Tom Crean has really done a fine job there.

Penn State's offense is strikingly similar to what it was last season, which maybe shouldn't be surprising given the returning core of experienced players. What is surprising is the change in the team's defensive DNA. The Nittany Lions led the entire nation in defensive rebounding percentage last season, but this and managing to not foul were the only virtues of Penn State's defense. They were among the nation's worst teams in forcing turnovers, and the defense as a whole was mediocre.

Now, with largely the same players, Penn State has become merely decent on the defensive glass but has gotten much better at forcing turnovers. They've done this without putting opponents on the foul line more, and they've actually improved their two-point defense as well. This last point seems to stem from a sudden outburst of blocked shots, largely due to Jeff Brooks' emergence. Penn State still doesn't look like a team that will do much damage, but they're clearly better than last season. Whether teams like Northwestern and Minnesota can win at Penn State could end up deciding their NCAA Tournament fate.

While we're on the subject, how about the play of Jeff Brooks? He's truly broken out and is finally living up to his top 100 rating. Do you see any other surprisingly good starts in the conference?

Josh: Obviously Watford tops my list, and Brandon Paul hasn't been half-bad either.  I must admit, I'm a bit shocked at just how good Trevor Mbakwe has been.  When fans lament, "man, I wish we had an enforcer down low," they're talking about Mbakwe.  I'm also taken aback by the play of Jordan Morgan at Michigan--usually you don’t see this out of redshirt freshmen--but Beilein is getting a lot out of him. Mike Tisdale's rebounding numbers are pretty shocking as well, but the biggest surprise is either Darius Morris or John Hart.  Both were inefficient role players last season, and have turned into very effective players this year.  This is especially true with Morris, who would be pushing for the best point guard in the conference in any other league--in the Big Ten he's just another guy.  But I actually thought Morris was a pretty good player when I watched him last year, but just made too many freshman errors.  Hart though, that came out of left field.

I'll let you wrap it up--give me your freshman of the year, not named Jared Sullinger.

Mike: You know a player is having a great year when you have to exclude him to make an award discussion interesting. Sullinger has lived up to the hype.

After Sullinger, the freshman class is long on depth but short on headliners (so far). You've got plenty of guys that are doing well in smaller roles (Josh Gasser, Deshaun Thomas, Roy Marble, Austin Hollins, Keith Appling, Aaron Craft), but there aren't a lot of guys just jumping off the page. Tim Hardaway Jr. deserves some mention for an offensive rating above 100 with a heavy shot diet (26 percent), but his value is largely driven by a low turnover rate--he's shooting just 27 percent from three. Victor Oladipo has also played well, shooting 53 percent and leading the Big Ten in steal percentage, but he's still playing bench-type minutes and has some turnover issues.

Honestly, I think Jordan Morgan has been the most productive non-Sullinger freshman thus far--he's rebounded well, especially on the offensive end, and he's shooting 62 percent from the field for a team that desperately needs inside play. Morgan's surprising output is a big part of Michigan's stronger-than-expected start.

I guess that just about does it as we get closer and closer to conference play. Penn State and Indiana will tip it off just two days after Christmas, when things really get interesting. Hats off to the Big Ten for a job well done in nonconference play; now let's get down to the business of determining a champion.