The rivalry between Ohio State and Michigan extends well beyond football, and the 2026-27 men’s basketball season offers another chance to compare two Big Ten programs with very different recent paths. Michigan enters as the defending national champion after a 37-3 season, while Ohio State returns after a 21-13 campaign that ended with a first-round NCAA Tournament loss. Both teams have rebuilt through the transfer portal and high school recruiting, creating distinct roster constructions under Jake Diebler in Columbus and Mike Boynton Jr. in Ann Arbor.
Rather than declaring a clear winner, this look examines the projected starting lineups, depth, experience, size, and positional strengths of each group based on available information heading into the season.
Projected Starting Lineups
Michigan’s projected starting five, according to reports from coach Boynton, features a mix of returning talent and portal additions. Elliot Cadeau returns at point guard after a strong first season in Ann Arbor that included Final Four Most Outstanding Player honors. Trey McKenney is expected to start alongside him in the backcourt. Roddy Gayle Jr., a veteran wing with significant college experience and a history of strong tournament performances, slots in on the wing. In the frontcourt, J.P. Estrella (from Tennessee) and Moustapha Thiam (from Cincinnati, who averaged 12.8 points, 7.1 rebounds, and 1.6 blocks last season) form the starting big-man tandem.
Ohio State’s projected starters center on a blend of returners and newcomers. Justin Pippen, the Cal transfer who averaged 14.2 points and 4.6 assists last season, is widely viewed as the likely point guard. John Mobley Jr. returns as a key scorer and shooter after averaging nearly 16 points last year and earning preseason All-Big Ten recognition. Five-star freshman Anthony Thompson, a 6-foot-9 wing and one of the highest-rated recruits in the class, is expected to start at small forward. Amare Bynum returns at power forward after a productive freshman season, while the center spot appears to be a competition between the returning Josh Ojianwuna (who missed last season with a knee injury but averaged 7.4 points and 6.4 rebounds at Baylor previously) and Kentucky transfer Andrija Jelavic.
Backcourt Comparison
Michigan’s backcourt carries significant experience and proven production. Cadeau and McKenney both received preseason All-Big Ten recognition, and Gayle adds veteran presence. The group has played in high-stakes games and contributed to a national title run. Depth includes options such as Kenny Noland (a Columbia transfer granted an extra year of eligibility) and younger players, though five-star freshman Brandon McCoy Jr. is out for the season with an ACL injury.
Ohio State’s backcourt features high-level scoring potential from Mobley and Pippen, along with additional options in transfers Jimmie Williams (15.1 points per game at Duquesne) and Curtis Givens III. The combination of Mobley’s shooting and Pippen’s playmaking gives the Buckeyes a different dynamic. Freshman LJ Smith also provides another guard option. While Michigan’s returning starters have more high-level experience together, Ohio State’s backcourt has more portal-based scoring production entering the season.
Frontcourt and Size
Michigan’s frontcourt underwent major turnover after losing Yaxel Lendeborg, Morez Johnson Jr., and Aday Mara to the NBA. Estrella and Thiam bring proven production from Power conference programs, and Jalen Reed (from LSU) adds further depth. The group is expected to emphasize rebounding and rim protection, though it lacks the continuity of last year’s championship frontcourt. Freshman Quinn Costello offers stretch potential as a potential rotation piece.
Ohio State specifically targeted size this offseason. The roster includes multiple players in the 6-foot-8 to 7-foot-2 range, including Jelavic (6-foot-11), Ojianwuna (6-foot-10), Njegovan (7-foot-2), and Bynum (6-foot-8). Thompson’s 6-foot-9 frame adds versatility on the wing. Diebler has highlighted improved rebounding as a priority after last season’s shortcomings, and the physical profile of the group is designed to address that. Michigan’s frontcourt has more immediate proven production from transfers, while Ohio State has greater overall length and more options at the big positions.
Depth and Experience
Both teams feature significant roster turnover. Michigan returns key guards but rebuilt much of its frontcourt and lost head coach Dusty May to the NBA. The Wolverines still have a core of players who contributed to a championship, along with additional portal pieces. Reports indicate Boynton views the rotation as deep enough for an eight- to nine-man group.
Ohio State returns only two primary starters (Mobley and Bynum) while adding multiple transfers and high-end freshmen. Diebler has described the group as the deepest of his tenure. The Buckeyes have more newcomers overall, which creates both opportunity and integration challenges. Michigan’s experience edge comes primarily from its returning guards and the championship pedigree of last season, while Ohio State’s depth edge lies in the volume of size and the mix of proven transfer production across positions.
Positional Strengths and Potential Matchups
Michigan’s strength appears concentrated in its backcourt experience and the proven interior production of Thiam and Estrella. The ability of Cadeau and McKenney to create, combined with Gayle’s veteran play, gives the Wolverines a known commodity in half-court and transition settings. Ohio State’s advantages show up in wing size with Thompson, perimeter scoring options, and overall frontcourt length. The Buckeyes’ ability to space the floor with shooters while still fielding multiple bigs could create different matchup problems.
When the teams meet—Ohio State hosts Michigan to close the regular season—the matchup will likely hinge on how each frontcourt performs and which backcourt controls tempo. Michigan enters with more proven high-level experience, while Ohio State enters with greater physical length and more new scoring options.
Conclusion
Neither roster is clearly superior on paper. Michigan retains more continuity from a championship team in the backcourt and has added experienced frontcourt transfers, though it must replace significant production from last year’s front line. Ohio State has rebuilt with an emphasis on size and added multiple scoring options through the portal and recruiting, but it faces the task of integrating a large number of new pieces.
The better roster will ultimately be determined by health, chemistry, and performance over the course of a long Big Ten season rather than preseason projections alone. Both programs have constructed groups capable of competing near the top of the conference, and the results on the court will provide the clearest answer.
