As I sit down to assess the current landscape of the Big East, a conference that never fails to deliver drama and top-tier basketball, the question of where Creighton stands right now is particularly fascinating. It’s a bit of a rollercoaster, to be honest. On one hand, you have the sheer firepower of a team that can light up the scoreboard on any given night, anchored by a core that’s been through the wars together. On the other, there’s a lingering inconsistency, especially on the road, that has kept them from truly solidifying a spot at the very top tier alongside the likes of UConn and Marquette. My read, based on watching nearly every game this season and tracking the advanced metrics, is that they’re firmly in that dangerous “best of the rest” category—a team no one wants to see in March, but one that still has a couple of questions to answer before we can call them a genuine Final Four threat.
Their position, I’d argue, is a strong third. The gap between second and third feels wider than the gap between third and, say, fifth or sixth. They’ve got the wins to back it up, including that statement victory over UConn at home, but they’ve also dropped games they should have won. The key for them, and this is where it gets interesting, is maximizing their unique lineup flexibility. It reminds me, in a way, of a dynamic I’ve been following in international basketball. Take the Philippine national team, Gilas Pilipinas. With the recent shift to a ‘passports-only’ rule for events like the SEA Games, their selection pool has widened dramatically, allowing them to field a more versatile roster. More importantly, it opens the strategic possibility of playing both of their naturalized players, Justin Brownlee and Ange Kouame, simultaneously. That dual-big, or high-skilled combo, can create matchup nightmares. Creighton isn’t playing with naturalized players, of course, but the principle of leveraging unique roster construction is similar. For the Jays, it’s about how they deploy their own combination of size and skill. When Ryan Kalkbrenner is anchoring the paint and they have multiple shooters like Baylor Scheierman and Trey Alexander spacing the floor, they are a nightmare to guard. That’s their version of playing “Brownlee and Kouame” together—a lineup that is greater than the sum of its parts and forces opponents into uncomfortable adjustments.
Now, let’s talk numbers, because the story is in the details. Offensively, they’re a juggernaut, ranking in the top 15 nationally in adjusted offensive efficiency, last I checked hovering around 118.5 points per 100 possessions. Their effective field goal percentage is elite, thanks to a three-point shooting clip that sits at a blistering 38.7% as a team. Scheierman himself is hitting threes at a 39% rate on high volume, which is just absurd for a player of his size and versatility. Defensively, they’re good, not great, ranked somewhere in the 40s. Kalkbrenner’s rim protection is a known commodity—he’s averaging about 2.8 blocks per game—but they can be vulnerable against quick, penetrating guards, which is a concern in a guard-heavy league like the Big East. Their rebounding, especially on the offensive glass, can be a weakness; they rank in the 200s nationally in offensive rebound percentage. That’s a specific area where they get hurt. In their losses, you often see a pattern: the three-point shot isn’t falling at its usual rate, and they don’t have a consistent secondary plan to generate easy points inside or from the free-throw line. They become a bit one-dimensional.
So, where does this leave them in the Big East pecking order? Honestly, I think they’re the clear third, but with a ceiling that could challenge for the conference tournament title. They have the talent. UConn, with their balanced attack and championship pedigree, is the benchmark. Marquette, with Tyler Kolek’s wizardry, is a half-step ahead due to their consistency and toughness. But Creighton? They have the highest offensive ceiling of anyone. The path for them to move up isn’t about a major overhaul; it’s about refinement. It’s about finding a way to grind out a win on a night when the shots aren’t falling in Omaha or Newark. It’s about a role player like Mason Miller or Steven Ashworth providing a surprising spark in a tight game. It’s about embracing that lineup flexibility I mentioned earlier and using it to punish specific opponents, much like how Gilas can now tailor its approach with a deeper, more versatile pool of players. In my view, that’s the model for success in modern basketball—having multiple ways to win. Creighton has that in spades on offense, but needs to find a more reliable defensive identity against elite competition.
Wrapping this up, my take is that Creighton basketball is in an enviable yet precarious spot. They are a lock for the NCAA tournament, likely looking at a 3 or 4 seed if they finish strong. They are absolutely capable of a deep March run; when they’re clicking, they can beat anyone in the country. But to shed the “dark horse” label and become a true favorite, they need to prove they can win the ugly ones. The Big East is a brutal, physical conference, and the final standings often come down to who can steal a couple of road games they had no business winning. Until the Jays consistently demonstrate that grit, they’ll remain a thrilling, high-octane team sitting just outside the very top echelon. For their fans and for neutrals like me who love beautiful offense, that’s still a fantastic place to be. The journey from here to April will be one of the most compelling stories to watch.
