BLOOMINGTON, Ind. – This story is part of a series that will continue through October. Is Indiana better than each of its Big Ten opponents?

Nine categories were chosen. There will be no ties in individual categories. Think of it like you would the Supreme Court.

The categories: Point guard play, free throw shooting, inside scoring, perimeter shooting, rebounding, perimeter defense, rim protection, how much proven Power Five talent is on the roster, and intangibles.

The daily series will cover both the men’s and women’s basketball teams, and it will alternate between the teams.

Today, the Washington women’s basketball team is in focus. Of the new Big Ten schools, the women’s focus has largely been on the Los Angeles schools – and rightfully so. Both are Top 5 teams with some of the best talent in the game.

Washington comes in far under the radar in comparison, but it would be a mistake to overlook the Huskies.

Washington (16-15 in 2024) had a very young team in 2024. There were only two upperclassmen playing regularly. All but one starter returns as Washington only lost two reserves in the portal.

The opportunity is there for this team to grow together, but Washington also has to prove it can win at a level that puts it in the top half of the Big Ten.

While the Huskies learned on the job in 2024, they finished 10th in the 12-team Pac-12. Washington is hoping its young core can lead them to the NCAA Tournament for the first time since 2017.

Here’s how the battle between the Hoosiers and Huskies shakes out.

• Point guard play – Washington put multiple ball-handlers on the floor at once in 2024. Hannah Stines (2.5 apg) is the returning leader in assists, but Sayvia Sellers (2.2 apg) and Ellie Ladine (1.6 apg) also contribute. Another player to watch here is McDonald’s All-American Devin Coppinger, a four-star recruit.

Does it lead Washington’s offense to a better place than Indiana? Not yet. Indiana ranked 15th in scoring in 2024 and Washington was 198th. Chloe Moore-McNeil is a rock at point guard for the Hoosiers, and she is a big part of the reason Indiana is as good as it is. Edge: Indiana.

• Free throw shooting – Ladine (82%) is Washington’s best shooter and she’s surrounded by Stines (76.9%), Eastern Michigan transfer Tayra Eke (75.4%), Sellers (74.2%) and Yale transfer Brenna McDonald (71.2%). Indiana has Shay Ciezki (90.2%), Sydney Parrish (79.2%) and Moore-McNeil (76.1%). But in this case, a quantity of good free throw shooters is what any team wants. Edge: Washington.

• Inside scoring – Dalayah Daniels (11.9 ppg) is Washington’s most experienced returning player and she is the source of the Huskies’ scoring in the paint. Washington added McDonald (10.8 ppg). Washington also added Eke, a 6-foot-3 center, who averaged 9.3 points at Eastern Michigan. While Daniels is more proven at the Power Five level, she still has more proven experience than Indiana’s post players. Edge: Washington.

• Perimeter shooting – Washington has solid shooters, led by sophomore Chloe Briggs, who converted 35.7% in a reserve role in 2024. Like most Big Ten teams, Washington cannot match Indiana’s trio of Yarden Garzon, Parrish and Moore-McNeil – all 40%-plus shooters from long range. Edge: Indiana.

• Rebounding – Washington is like Indiana in that it doesn’t have a dominant returning rebounder, but it has a lot of good ones. Lilly Meister and Karoline Striplin have the potential to be excellent rebounders, but haven’t yet had the chance to prove it with a big minutes load.

Daniels (7.2 rpg), Ladine (5.4 rpg) and Stines (4.7 rpg) have proven it. Add in Eke (7.3 rpg) and McDonald (6.9 rpg) and the Huskies get the nod. Edge: Washington.

• Perimeter defense – Washington was middle-of-the-pack in the Pac-12 in scoring defense (66.8 ppg) and field goal defense (43.2%) in conference games in 2024. Indiana’s perimeter defense is very good with Moore-McNeil, Parrish and Lexus Bargesser. Those players are more experienced in the Big Ten wars, too. Edge: Indiana.

• Defense at the rim – Daniels is a good shot blocker at 1.8 blocks per game. Washington is counting on Eke and McDonald to help here, too. Meister and Striplin might hold their own here, but they just aren’t as proven yet. Edge: Washington.

• Proven Power 5 ability on roster – The standard here is whether a player averaged 25 minutes or more at the Power Five level at their current or former school.

We have a tie as Stines, Daniels, Ladine and Sellers all clear the threshold for Washington. That matches Ciezki, Garzona, Moore-McNeil and Parrish for Indiana. Tie goes to the next-most experienced Power Five player and that’s Bargesser (21.6 mpg) by a bit over a minute than Briggs (20.2 mpg). Edge: Indiana.

• Intangibles – Washington coach Tina Langley appears to be putting a good thing together in Seattle. However, there’s a lot to overcome in season one of Big Ten play. Talented or not, this is still a young team that will still have to absorb some lessons on their way to winning more regularly. Add in the strain of travel and near-constant new opponents? That’s a lot to overcome … even if Washington has the promise to get there eventually. Edge: Indiana.

• Verdict – Indiana wins 5-4 over the Huskies. So many of these verdicts are close for the Indiana women given that Meister and Striplin were reserves in 2024. If either or both of them produce in the way their limited time has suggested they can, Indiana will be in a lot better shape than some of these scores indicate.

Previous Is Indiana Better Than Women’s Basketball Results

Oregon – Indiana 5-4.

Rutgers – Indiana 5-4.

Maryland – Maryland 7-2.

USC – USC 6-3.

Penn State – Indiana 8-1.

Minnesota – Indiana 6-3.

Michigan – Indiana 9-0.

UCLA – UCLA 8-1.

Ohio State – Ohio State 5-4.

Iowa – Indiana 5-4.

Michigan State – Michigan State 5-4.