The gap — sixteen spots — might be the most telling in the entire poll. One major outlet even ranked them 24th. It’s a clear example of where analytics and reputation diverge. The AP voters appear to be bracing for a “big regression” from a team that finished 7th in NET,8th in Kenpom last year and returns its superstar driving most of the success.
What’s being overlooked is that Gonzaga quietly returns the foundation that is not just good but built to explode statistically if they simply optimize their usage patterns. The ceiling of this team goes up dramatically the moment Mark Few leans harder into Ike and Huff minutes. They have another gear, one that rarely gets discussed or pointed out. Even playing at their current minutes last year, they were still the biggest drivers of a top 7 or 8 team in the metrics, and they almost certainly both will play more this year.
Graham Ike — The Engine That Elevates Everyone Let’s start with Ike, because his value goes far beyond the box score. He’s the kind of player who inflates his teammates’ assist rates simply by being on the floor and being a walking bucket when he is. Forty-two point nine points per 100 possessions is top two in the nation, and he does it at a .656 true shooting clip. We saw it at Wyoming — Hunter Maldonado’s assist rate jumped into elite territory largely because of Ike. It wasn’t that Maldonado suddenly became a world-class passer, and when Ike moved on to Gonzaga the next season, his assists dropped like a rock, nearly 40%.
That exact dynamic repeated itself last season with Ryan Nembhard. People love to talk about Nembhard’s “floor general” ability, but the truth is, Ike’s post ability did the heavy lifting in that offense. He drew doubles, opened driving lanes, and forced rotations that made Nembhard’s reads simple even when he was finishing easy assists himself. When Ike was healthy and in rhythm, Gonzaga’s efficiency spiked across the board. You can literally track their offensive pulse to his minutes.
If Gonzaga simply plays Ike and Huff more, they should immediately regain top-10 offensive form. The sample of Ike and Huff playing together is only 101 possessions, but it was dominant at +41.7. Regardless of whether it’s a perfect fit, sometimes talent ultimately matters to get the best players on the court, and these two are among the top in the nation — Ike top 5 and Huff pushing top 100 statistically.
Mario Saint-Supéry — The Pro-Ready, Yet Not Noticed Then there’s Mario Saint-Supéry, arguably the most under-discussed addition of any program this offseason. He comes from the ACB, the second-strongest league in the world after the NBA — not some developmental afterthought, but a professional league filled with former NBA and EuroLeague players. At just 18, Saint-Supéry posted an 18 PER on a 25% usage rate in that league. He was the 4th leading scorer on a .500 team. For context, that’s production not even comparable to high-level college veterans, but he was doing it against grown men with years of pro experience. In one box score of about a dozen, he had a 17-point, 5-assist game in 22 minutes, on 10 shots with only 2 turnovers versus a team with six former NBA players aged 25 to 30. There were multiple games like this on his resume.
Watching some video, I think his game fits perfectly with Gonzaga’s structure: powerful frame, advanced handle, scoring instincts, and the ability to create and finish through contact. He’s not a “freshman guard” learning the college game — he’s a pro who’s already forced to make reads against elite competition. If Few hands him the keys, Saint-Supéry can become the connective guard that blows away the role players Nembhard managed — but with far more scoring upside.
Ryan Nembhard — Floor General Myth For all the talk about “veteran leadership” and “steady floor generals,” the numbers make it clear: Ryan Nembhard was one of the most overrated players in college basketball over the last few seasons.
At Gonzaga, he posted just a 17% usage rate and a .540 true shooting percentage — pedestrian efficiency numbers that came while playing in a low-pressure scoring role against roughly 70th-ranked strength of schedule competition. Even then, he averaged just 10 points in 35 minutes per game. All these numbers were even worse the previous season as well. That’s not a lead guard carrying an elite offense — that’s a system player managed and propped up by the talent around him, like Ike.
Now enter Mario Saint-Supéry, and the contrast couldn’t be sharper. He comes from the ACB, the second-best professional league in the world after the NBA — a league filled with grown men, not college sophomores. At just 18 years old, he put up a 25% usage rate, a .620 true shooting percentage, and a 25.3 assist rate — elite efficiency and playmaking against professional defenses. Nembhard had an 18 PER versus the 70th-best college schedule, mostly against the WCC. Saint-Supéry had an 18 PER versus the ACB in 33 games. There is no comparison, yet many national pundits think there will be a massive drop-off. Some even think he will not win the starting job over a Patriot League transfer who had a .500 true shooting percentage there.
That’s not a “potential” argument. That’s proof of production at a higher level of competition. His PER in the ACB was nearly identical to Nembhard’s in the WCC in the aggregate — the difference being that Saint-Supéry did it against EuroLeague-caliber opponents, while Nembhard struggled against even competition comparable to the best in college, especially when the top 35 teams last year played strength-of-schedule more typical of what the top three teams usually face.
Few doesn’t need another “safe” point guard; he’s already shown he can win with dynamic, multi-level scorers like Dan Dickau and Nigel Williams-Goss. What Saint-Supéry offers is that same blend of control and aggression — a player who can both create and finish, not just make the first simple read after Ike gets doubled. It’s not that they even lose facilitating. Saint-Supéry had a 25 percent assist rate. Nembhard’s was only 29 percent in his first year at Gonzaga versus much inferior competition.
The upside here is obvious: Gonzaga finally has a perimeter initiator who can score efficiently, pressure the rim, and still facilitate, rather than another pass-first guard who disappears against elite competition. If Few fully unleashes Saint-Supéry, Gonzaga’s ceiling isn’t just “back to normal.” It’s much higher than it’s been with Nembhard.
Another Gear — When It All Clicks When you blend Ike’s interior gravity and Saint-Supéry’s pro-ready handle, Gonzaga suddenly has another gear. This isn’t hypothetical — it’s supported by per-possession efficiency and usage metrics. Last season’s lineups were often limited by what Nembhard could do. Now, fully healthy and optimized, this team’s offensive ceiling spikes dramatically. That’s the kind of dynamic the AP voters seem to overlook.
Put simply: Gonzaga’s offense runs through Graham Ike. When you build correctly around him — shooters, cutters, and a pro-ready guard like Saint-Supéry — assist numbers rise, efficiency climbs, and the ceiling looks a lot like vintage Gonzaga. If the AP wants to bet on decline, fine. But all evidence points to another surge once they unleash their best lineup consistently. It’s a program that hasn’t finished worse than 12th in KenPom since 2016.
Bottom Line The 16-spot gap between the AP Poll and the top 5 where we had them is not just an anomaly — it’s a window into a broader trend: analytics recognize returning production, proven efficiency, and true roster upside in a way that perception often does not. Gonzaga isn’t slipping. They’re poised to be one of the most efficient, versatile, and dangerous teams in college basketball once Few fully leans into his roster’s strengths. Now maybe he doesn’t and I’m wrong, but look at his track record. I’m betting on that every time when the talent lines up as well.
This is even with having Tayon Grant-Foster as one of the most overhyped players in the nation in a previous write-up. That gives a window into how under rated I think Ike and Saint-Supéry are nationally. Both can be top-25 type players in the nation and potentially lead Gonzaga as a serious title contender in my estimation, and you are talking about the difference between a top-5 national title contender and a barely in-the-top-25 also-ran in relevance.
