Teams › Big Ten · Compare Indiana with another team

Indiana
Indiana returns 13% of last season's minutes and rates #50 on offense and #52 on defense of 365 teams. 80% range: +4.1 to +18.7.
Why we have them here
Indiana's preseason projection of +11.4 (No. 55 of 365) starts from the roster: its players' ratings, weighted by projected minutes, add up to a roll-up worth +6.8, about the +6.8 typical of teams ranked near it. Last season's rating (No. 44 at the end of 2025-26) adds +2.5, more than its neighbours' +1.6; the program's level two and three seasons back and the roster's experience and shape add +1.4. A stretch at the top of the scale adds +0.4, because a straight-line calibration shrinks elite teams. It returns 13% of last season's minutes, less than teams ranked near it (33%). The projection leans most on Aiden Sherrell (+5.3), Bryce Lindsay (+3.0) and Markus Burton (+2.7); the newcomer who matters most is Aiden Sherrell, a transfer from Alabama, at +5.3. Its 80% range, +4.1 to +18.7, is about as wide as that of teams ranked near it.
Generated from the published projection's own terms, not written by hand. "Teams ranked near it" are the thirty nearest in the preseason order. Preseason projection frozen 2026-10-23; how the projection is built.
Roster
Returning 12% · Transfer 73% · Freshman 12% · Other newcomer 3%
| Rank | Player | Pos | Ht | D1 yrs | Group | From | MPG | Rating | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 37 | Aiden Sherrell | F | 6-10 | 2 | Transfer | Alabama | 24 | +8.9 | +5.3 |
| 242 | Bryce Lindsay | G | 6-3 | 3 | Transfer | Villanova | 26 | +4.7 | +3.0 |
| 256 | Markus Burton | G | 6-0 | 3 | Transfer | Notre Dame | 21 | +5.0 | +2.7 |
| 345 | Samet Yigitoglu | C | 7-2 | 2 | Transfer | SMU | 24 | +4.2 | +2.5 |
| 803 | Darren Harris | G | 6-5 | 2 | Transfer | Duke | 11 | +2.9 | +0.8 |
| 937 | Jaeden Mustaf | G | 6-6 | 2 | Transfer | Georgia Tech | 22 | +1.6 | +0.9 |
| 1303 | Vaughn Karvala | F | 6-6 | 0 | Freshman | High school | 8 | +0.9 | +0.2 |
| 1389 | Trent Sisley | F | 6-8 | 1 | Returning | Indiana | 12 | +0.5 | +0.1 |
| 1521 | Trevor Manhertz | F | 6-8 | 0 | Freshman | High school | 9 | +0.3 | +0.1 |
| 1882 | Jordan Rayford | F | 6-5 | 2 | Other newcomer | 3 | -0.6 | +0.0 | |
| 1909 | Prince-Alexander Moody | G | 6-4 | 0 | Freshman | High school | 8 | -0.4 | -0.1 |
| 2104 | Tryce Grensing | G | 6-0 | 1 | Returning | Indiana | 4 | -0.9 | -0.1 |
| 2110 | Drew Snively | G | 6-5 | 1 | Returning | Indiana | 4 | -0.9 | -0.1 |
| 2120 | Ian Stephens | G | 6-5 | 3 | Returning | Indiana | 4 | -1.0 | -0.1 |
| 2149 | Clemens Sokolov | F | 7-0 | 0 | Other newcomer | 4 | -1.1 | -0.1 | |
| 3165 | Ben Winker | G | 6-10 | 1 | Transfer | Cal State Fullerton | 4 | -2.3 | -0.2 |
| 5145 | Justin Monden | G | 6-0 | 1 | Transfer | Maryland Eastern Shore | 13 | -4.8 | -1.6 |
A player's rating is points per 100 possessions better than an average Division I player while he is on the floor. Contribution weights it by the share of a rotation slot he is projected to play, so a star on the bench and a role player who never sits both read right. Rank is among all 5,249 rated players. MPG is the projected share of a rotation slot times 40. "From" is last season's team. The bars are contribution, the player's rating times his projected share; their sum is the roll-up the projection starts from.
Schedule
| Date | Opponent | Proj. margin | Win prob. | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mon Nov 02 | vs | +20.2 | 95% | ||
| Thu Nov 05 | vs | +18.9 | 94% | ||
| Mon Nov 09 | N | +1.7 | 56% | ||
| Thu Nov 12 | vs | +18.5 | 93% | ||
| Tue Nov 17 | N | -4.4 | 36% | ||
| Fri Nov 20 | N | -4.7 | 35% | ||
| Tue Nov 24 | vs | +16.8 | 92% | ||
| Fri Nov 27 | vs | +18.6 | 93% | ||
| Tue Dec 01 | vs | conf | +8.2 | 75% | |
| Thu Dec 03 | vs | +25.4 | 98% | ||
| Mon Dec 07 | at | conf | -5.6 | 32% | |
| Sat Dec 12 | vs | +8.8 | 76% | ||
| Fri Dec 18 | vs | +5.7 | 68% | ||
| Tue Dec 22 | vs | +20.2 | 95% | ||
| Sat Jan 02 | vs | conf | +2.0 | 56% | |
| Wed Jan 06 | at | conf | -2.2 | 43% | |
| Sat Jan 09 | at | conf | +0.8 | 52% | |
| Tue Jan 12 | vs | conf | +4.9 | 66% | |
| Sat Jan 16 | vs | conf | -2.6 | 42% | |
| Wed Jan 20 | at | conf | -2.1 | 43% | |
| Sun Jan 24 | vs | conf | -4.2 | 37% | |
| Wed Jan 27 | at | conf | -1.0 | 47% | |
| Sat Jan 30 | vs | conf | +0.9 | 53% | |
| Tue Feb 02 | at | conf | -0.5 | 48% | |
| Sat Feb 06 | at | conf | -9.5 | 22% | |
| Tue Feb 09 | vs | conf | +6.0 | 69% | |
| Sat Feb 13 | at | conf | -2.3 | 43% | |
| Tue Feb 16 | vs | conf | +2.2 | 57% | |
| Fri Feb 19 | at | conf | -5.7 | 32% | |
| Tue Feb 23 | vs | conf | -3.8 | 38% | |
| Sun Feb 28 | vs | conf | +0.7 | 52% | |
| Fri Mar 05 | at | conf | -4.6 | 35% |
Projected margin is from Indiana's side, with home court where the game is not neutral (N). Games are the schedule as posted; tournaments and late additions appear as they are listed. Predictions are as of 2026-10-26 and reflect the roster as the model has it on that date.