LeftCoastHotSpot retweetledi
deep dive 6: washington huskies – a metrical anomaly
bracketball projection for 2026-2027:
14-18 (6-14); 16th in the big 10; miss ncaat
last season’s results:
16-17 (7-13); t-12th in the big 10
2025-26 roster breakdown:
*see media*
incoming recruits + transfers:
*see media*
deep dive:
danny sprinkle’s (hereafter, “danny”, “sprinkle” or “ds”) time in seattle could very well be coming to an end if he fails to exceed bracketball projections. after two very successful stints as head coach at montana state and utah state, where he had three 25+ win teams and made three trips to the ncaat in five years, washington has failed to break .500 with ds at the helm, finishing 18th (dead last) and t-12th in his first two seasons, respectively.
my confidence in sprinkle is starting to diminish a bit after this past year. year 1 anywhere, and especially in the big 10, is going to be tough, but sprinkle was gifted the 3rd best portal class according to on3 (13th best according to 247sports), in addition to one of the best, most dominant freshmen in the country in hannes steinbach and put together a very disappointing season. it is worth noting that washington did show promise and lost a lot of very close games. as a matter of fact, 7 of their losses were by 6 or less – 5 of those by 4 points or less – but their inability to finish games ultimately cost them. they played some of the big dogs (michigan, purdue, nebraska, illinois) tough, but also racked up a few bad losses against bottom feeders like penn state, maryland and oregon.
with the classes (transfer and recruiting) that sprinkle has been able to bring in these past few seasons, and the lack of success he has been able to produce with them, i have serious doubts about this husky team next year. their portal, recruiting and overall classes currently rank 43rd, 115th and 73rd, respectively, which is not horrible but the roster construction is just not adding up for me (i’ll speak more to this shortly). and with how little ds has been able to put together with great classes, i don’t see this class outperforming to the point where washington is even close to a top half big ten team, or a .500 team overall.
washington, metrically, had some bright spots. they were a t70 team in adj off and def efficiency; two pretty telling stats – 46/70 (~66%) and 28/30 (~93%) teams t70 and t30, respectively, in adj off efficiency this past year made the tournament. in terms of adj def efficiency, these splits were a little less extreme but still telling – 41/70 (~59%) and 22/30 (~73%). interestingly enough, washington was one of three teams t70 in both of these metrics to not make the tournament – the other two being indiana and new mexico. indiana was a first four out team and new mexico was a next four out team – both finished over .500, making washington the only team to finish t70 in both of these categories and finish the season with a losing record. this husky team was the first team since wvu in 2021-22 to finish t70 in both of these metrics whilst finishing with a losing record (wvu finished with the same 16-17 record). pretty insane.
some other positives for the huskies this past season came in the form of free throw shooting, rebounding and taking care of the ball/preventing fast breaks. washington was 43rd in the nation in team ft%. free throws always seem to be something that coaches and analysts harp on and while they are an incredibly important part of the game, i found this stat interesting: only 20 out of the 70 top free throw shooting teams in the nation (~28%) made the ncaat. i’d be interested to zoom in on this with @cbbanalytics and look at team clutch ft percentages (only have the free tier at this point which won’t allow me to look at this metric). teams like iowa state, north carolina, miami, tennessee, and more, were all bottom 100 in terms of team ft % and still made the ncaat, and in some cases still made a nice run. if i had to guess, these were teams that stepped up their percentages at important points of the game.
while the huskies shot a nice percentage, and were t50, from the free throw line this past year, they did not get there very often. their ft rate was .301 – 301st in the nation. so while they may have shot well when they got fouled and went to the line, they weren’t there very often. certainly not often enough. it would also be foolish, naïve, to extrapolate a stat like this and think that if they simply got to the line more with this ft %, they would have scored more points and won more games. but, with that being said, if they upped their ft rate just a little bit/got to the line a few more times a game, and, conservatively, their percentage was slightly worse (middle-of-the-pack – 72.5%), they would probably have a few more w’s to their name and, honestly, an outside shot at the tournament – some kind of postseason basketball at the very least. don’t forget, the huskies lost by 3 to wisco in the b10 tournament too.
it seems simple but in today’s college basketball landscape, efficient three-point shooting is imperative if you want a shot at success. washington, as a team, shot 31.5% from beyond the arc – 307th in the nation. to give you an idea of how likely it is that a team who shoots this poorly makes the tournament, only 2 of the bottom 50 teams in team 3p% made the field of 68 (4%). and only 8 of the bottom 150 teams made the field of 68 (~5%). short answer here is: shoot the ball well from beyond the arc and you give yourself a much better chance at dancing come march.
so where does sprinkle need to focus in order to get this program back on the right track? they’ve been to the ncaat once in the past 15 years. how can he make it twice? well, i think the obvious answer, after that last paragraph, would be add three-point shooting – and sprinkle has absolutely done this. as a matter of fact, the four guys that ds has gone out and got from the portal are all proven shooters; 3 of which average well over 3 three-point-attempts/game. friedrichsen shot over 40% from three this past year at davidson on 161 attempts (4.9/game), venters shot ~37% from three this past year at gonzaga on 98 attempts (3.6/game), watts shot ~32% from three this past year at tech on 78 attempts (2.4/game – he also shot over 40% in has previous two seasons at wazzu and ewu) and beasley shot ~33% from three this past year for the dons on 149 attempts (4.8/game). the volume, and efficiency, are certainly there with these guys – all of them shot better, in some cases significantly better, than washington did as a team this past year.
with all of that being said, the roster construction confuses me a little bit; washington has a few roster spots left and still really needs a solid big man, or two. hoping lathan sommerville takes the next step and becomes a 10+/6+ guy is just not something they should be banking on. he is definitely a solid player that i can absolutely see improving but he’s just not one of those bigs that’s going to bang around in the paint and do the dirty work and that is an essential part of any danny sprinkle team. there are very few size options left in the portal so if I had to guess, sprinkle will be going overseas for at least one more big guy before the offseason comes to a close.
see below for some of sprinkle’s international options:
kilian dueck (fc bayern muenchen 2nd team)
- 7’0 with nice touch and a solid frame. needs to strengthen a bit and is still a bit raw but there is certainly potential there. not necessarily the toughest guy on the floor either – will need to dig deep and find the grit before he steps on the college floor, especially with someone like sprinkle that needs you to battle for boards.
thomas acunzo (s. bernardo-cinelandia cantu u20)
- 6’10 with great touch around the basket and feel for the game. can step outside and hit shots as well. similar to dueck, needs to bulk a bit. looks to be physical inside and has terrific footwork.
mouhamadou landoure (dar city basketball team)
- 6’11 with really solid touch around the basket and feel for the game. i think this could be a realistic get and a guy that should be on coaches’ radar right now. college-ready body as well and can run the floor very well.
felix kiehlneker (orange academy ratiopharm)
- 6’10 with good instincts and feel for the game. very coordinated and physical with a complete understanding of the game. 2008-born. i think he could do well in this system
that is all for now.
cheers.
English
