@JayHawkFanToo
First, I guess we both have to stand corrected by @Texas-Hawk-10 and start saying "American Athletic Conference." (AAC)
Next, this conference is significantly better than I realized, when I took a look. It includes: Memphis, Temple, 'natti, and UConn. The last three would have been tough match ups for KU last season and the 'Natti had a darned good team.
Nevertheless, I am down, as some Alphabet generation used to say, with valid indexing.
My thinking is your formalization of indexing is helpful, but probably needs a little fine tuning for the anomaly of last season, when Nic was AAC POY.
Most years, your AAC < B12 inequality holds strong. But to be fair in indexing, I have to admit that I watched the 'Natti last season and they were VERY tough. Likable? No. Tough? Very.
And I watched SMU late last season and they were certainly good enough to have had a better than even chance against any B12 conference title threat team. They likely would have finished nearly as high, give or take a rank or two in the B12 last season, as the two teams finished in the AAC. This at least suggests to me that maybe the differences between the conferences were a bit less by the conference seasons than the pre conference comparisons of the past might have suggested. And in particular against the B12 conference champion, KU, it seems either 'Natti, which showed so well in the Madness, or SMU, which got bum whistled out of it, would have had a good chance of winning the B12 last season, or at the very least upsetting KU at least as often as ISU. Those were two very good AAC teams. And Temple was tough. And frankly, the B12 basement has been nothing to write home about for the last few years, despite the roughness of the game permitting them to win a few games by catching top teams injured or on emotional let downs in conference.
The Big 12 turned out not to have been quite so good as some thought last season. I mean, KU's weakest team in a long time won it outright. And Big 12 teams did not show well again in the Madness against non conference teams, when such competition counts most. And though I have hardly studied it closely, I recall someone saying the NBA draft was one indication that the Big 12 teams were apparently not uber talented.
So, when one gets out the indexing logic and tries to apply it, while the AAC tends to be less strong than the B12 most years, last season what appears to have happened was this: The Big 12 was still relatively more talented, especially through the middle, than AAC, but the B12's usual two top teams--KU and Texas--were far weaker than usual, even though early season expectations ran high for Texas (and were disproven). ISU seemed to come on strong, but like most B12 teams, it was a doughnut with a hole in the middle. And it gets sharply more difficult to assign a huge edge to the B12 when it is a conference with few bigs. ISU and KU last season held no huge advantage in bigs over mid majors like 'Natti and SMU in the AAC, or for that matter WSU in the MVC. And the B12's usual large edge in coaching was diminished at least some by LB being at SMU a second season. LB, Ollie, Dunphy, and Pastner (based on his winning percentage anyway), stack up pretty evenly with any four B12 coaches right?
So AAC < B12 is subject to significant variance last season bringing them much closer together than usual, at least in my anecdotal assessment.
It follows then that while in most years your equality of "3rd team All-Con B12 = 1st Team All Con AAC" would tend to hold, last season it probably was more like: "2rd team All Con AAC = 1st team All Con B12."
And when one adds in that when Nic was added to KU's WUG team the team promptly appeared to play sharply better than it had in the past, even without a lot of its players, well, it seems Devonte has some significant shoes to fill.
Further, when you stop and think about it, Devonte has a long way to go to develop into an indexed equivalent of Nic being POY of AAC which might index to "1st or 2rd runner-up POY in the B12.
There is really no way around this: Nic is pretty damned good and Devonte, while he sure seems within striking range of developing into as good of a player over time, has a ways to go.
Without putting too fine a point on it, Devonte has a long way to go-- having not been a starter as a freshman on one of Self's most injury riddled teams, then having gotten injured to point of not being able to play at all at the WUG, and so now having to start his sophomore year having to come back from injury.
Again, my point is not to knock Devonte at all. It is to put him in a reasonably indexed perspective of what he has to replace.
I am very confident that--injury recovery permitting--Devonte will this season be able to replace a piece of what Nic brought and for that we are most fortunate and it may be enough with the other pieces that we will hopefully add--BG, Svi, and Diallo--to make us a very good team in our own right without Nic--maybe even a better one. There is no doubt the Devonte, BG, Svi, and Diallo all operating as D1 capable 20 mpg men would turn this team in a huge force in D1, regardless of the short and medium stacks apparently placed strategically around D1.
But we will need them all reaching solid 20mpg men to really stand out IMHO.
Rock Chalk!!!!