It’s the most beautiful time of the year. The summer sizzle is giving way to autumn cool and some of the world’s best basketball players are gathering to play on a different stage. This isn’t the World Cup. This isn’t the Olympics. This is our game. This is our continent. This is EuroBasket 2025.

The stakes? Unfathomably high. The field? Deep, competitive and totally unpredictable. Everyone thinks they know who’s on top—but what happens when Nikola Jokić returns to Serbia, or when Latvia, the plucky, deep-shooting hosts, get the full-throated home crowd behind them in Riga? What about Germany, the World Cup champs, who’ve proven they can win when it matters most, or the new-look French team playing without their two best big men?

This is where the magic happens. Where two guys from the European Hoops Podcast, André Lemos and Tiago Cordeiro, who watch more FIBA basketball than is probably healthy, get to work. They’ve been poring over film, crunching numbers and arguing with each other about who’s for real, who’s a paper tiger and who’s a dark horse just waiting to shock the world.

So, who are the top dogs? Who are the teams that can go home with the Gold? And who’s going to be a tough out, a team you absolutely do not want to see in a knockout game? This is our definitive, take-no-prisoners EuroBasket Power Rankings. You’ll want to read every word.

1. Serbia (Andre 2, Cordeiro 1. Score = 3)

 

 

André: Nikola Jokić is back. That’s the headline, that’s the headline’s headline and that alone makes Serbia a rightful No. 1 for most. He’s flanked by Nikola Jović, who dropped 22 points in a friendly against Germany, a glimpse of how frightening this roster can be if the next wave is ready to pop. And of course they have the ultimate competitor and perhaps my personal favorite FIBA player Bogdan Bogdanović.

The return of Nikola Jokić isn’t just about his scoring; it’s about the entire offensive system that coach Svetislav Pešić can now run. Pešić is a master at building half-court offenses around a central hub and with Jokić, he has the ultimate creator. Expect Serbia to lean heavily on constant motion and off-ball screens, with Jokić acting as the “point center” from the high post. He’ll be setting up cutters and shooters, turning every possession into a chess match where Serbia has the first move. The real question is whether Pešić can instill the defensive discipline needed to contain teams that play with pace and high-volume shooting. I believe Latvia has enough to use clever defensive schemes against this team while being able to grind Serbia’s defense. Picking the number one of these Power Rankings was a close call and Serbia will look like a well-oiled machine starting the tournament as favorites from day 1.

I’ve Serbia on the top Tier with Latvia and Germany as true contenders. I project them to win Group A and make it all the way to the finals where I have them taking silver. Range: 1–2 feels right given their talent and Jokić’s presence, though a 1–3 window is the safer hedge if their defense gets cracked in a semifinal.

Cordeiro: Best player in the world. Is that enough?

With that being said, I can explain more about why they deserve the No. 1 spot.

Jokić thrives with smart teams and role players who can shoot, play off the ball, and an on-ball creator like Bogi. So, if I’m talking about elite players scoring 20-plus for their team, with these two guys paired up you can expect 45-plus points from them. Defensively, we can expect some liabilities. Slow-footed centers are the worst, as we know. Milutinov and Jokić will sometimes get exposed. Of course, Jokić is a good enough team defender to do the best he can and to cover up his weaknesses, so expect Serbia to still be quite good on defense.

Jović might become the key to this team. They were missing an elite 3-and-D guy who could bring athleticism on the wing, and he has been delivering so far.

This is a team that has it all. They can play smaller with Petrušev at the 5 or even Jokić at the 5, or they can play with size and get easy points in the post. They’re prepared to play against anyone. France’s athleticism might raise some warning signs, but aside from that style of play, I see Serbia having big advantages against any team.

 

2. Germany (André 3, Cordeiro 2. Score = 5)

 

 

André: The defending World Cup champs stumbled against Serbia, but don’t mistake that for weakness. Germany is built around balance, chemistry and relentless guard play. Dennis Schröder is still the engine, Franz Wagner is already a star and the whole group plays like they’ve rehearsed every possession for years.

If you believe in battle-tested teams that play hard and have enough options to adjust to different styles, and this one has earned that label, Gold is absolutely still in play.

I’ve them on my Tier 1 with Latvia and Serbia. I project them to reach the semifinals and lose there, before bouncing back to win Bronze. Range: clear number 3, though a 1–3 window is fair, Gold is still on the table if they repeat their World Cup form, while their battle-tested floor keeps them locked inside the medal range.

Cordeiro: Depth is the word to describe this team. Compared to previous years, they will miss some players like Mo Wagner, who I believe will be a big loss. This team might have the second-best dynamic duo in Franz Wagner and Dennis, and surrounding those two is a supporting cast that can stretch the floor and switch everything on defense. That’s why they won the World Cup, because of their intensity and versatility.

I do expect them to take a slight step back on defense with Weiler-Babb and Wagner missing. Their inside game, while versatile and able to shoot, might lack both talent and size compared to bigs like JV.

This group will only go as far as Dennis and Franz can take them, so Franz needs to become a better 3-point shooter compared to the last Olympics. Their margin of error is smaller than in previous years, so the question is: can Dennis control the tempo of the game and keep his turnovers low? Personally, I wouldn’t bet on it.

 

3. Latvia (André 1, Cordeiro 7. Score = 8)

 

 

André: Latvia is riding a wave. They stormed through qualifiers unbeaten building on their impressive World Cup run. Hosting matters in FIBA basketball and in Riga it will matter a lot, this is a home crowd that turns games into events and events into pressure cookers.

I said before the World Cup that this group could be special and nothing since has changed my mind. EuroBasket 2025 feels like Latvia’s tournament. Serbia may have the bigger names, but Latvia has the blueprint to make them sweat: pace, depth and relentlessness. They’ll run, shoot threes in volume and swarm ball-handlers until the opponent gasps for air.

The engine is fueled by guards and the numbers back that up. Latvia’s offensive rating in their qualifiers was among the best in Europe, but what’s more telling is their team-wide “assist-to-turnover ratio.” They don’t just move the ball; they move it smartly, creating efficient shots without wasted possessions. The bigger issue is on the other end. Their “defensive rebounding percentage” has been a consistent concern. Teams that pack the paint and crash the boards, like Lithuania, could expose this weakness and limit Latvia’s fast-break opportunities.

Artūrs Žagars looks ready to reprise his breakout run, and his chemistry with Kristaps Porziņģis is brewing in training camp into what could become the defining two-man action of the tournament. Rihards Lomažs and the rest of the guard rotation give Latvia the rare ability to keep two steady ball-handlers on the floor at all times, an underrated weapon in a FIBA setting. The question is whether that backcourt production holds when the shooting cools, and whether they can avoid being bullied on the glass.

The frontcourt pairing of Porziņģis and Andrejs Gražulis is another key dynamic worth tracking. If they click, Latvia unlocks yet another dimension, size, rim protection and shooting all in one package. Don’t expect Latvia to necessarily win Group A. Their roster looks like one that’s wired to peak as the competition goes, turning knockout games into chaos. That could mean revenge paths against Slovenia (2017 heartbreak) and Germany (2023 heartbreak). That’s a gauntlet, but this team isn’t built for shortcuts. They’re built to take the long way and finish with gold.

I have Latvia on my top Tier with Serbia and Germany. I project them to finish second in Group A, catch fire in the knockouts and ultimately win Gold. Range: 1–2 reflects their ceiling and hosting boost, though a 1–3 window might be the truer call, defensive rebounding issues and matchup variance could see them stumble in the semis.

When I was writing these Power Rankings, I had scribbled: “Keep an eye on Rodions Kurucs’ health status. At the moment, he’s still recovering from an injury and his status for the tournament is uncertain. He plays a key role for this team.”

And now, sadly, the worst has been confirmed, Kurucs will miss EuroBasket 2025. It’s a blow, no sugarcoating it. Latvia loses something they cannot really replace: the size, the length, the defensive presence that stretches across both ends of the floor. He would have been the go-to guy to chase players like Luka Doncic, Fontecchio, Dorsey, Bogdanovic, Franz Wagner. He should even have mattered in the group stage, especially against a team built with wing length and size like Turkey. Simply put, Latvia cannot replicate what he brings.

And so I sit, thinking. Rethinking. Simulating endless scenarios in my head. Is his absence enough to shake my #1 ranking heading into the competition? Maybe. It could be. Yet here’s the thing: I still keep Latvia in the top tier, shoulder to shoulder with Serbia and Germany. Kurucs was an essential piece of Banchi’s puzzle, yes. But the core of this team, the preparation, the design, the chemistry, is still intact.

I believe in them. I believe in a team built to ignite in the knockout stages, a team that plays with heart, that finds the margins when it matters most. And more than that, I truly believe they are the only other team in this tournament with a real shot to beat Serbia.

So when it comes down to a do-or-die final, when the gold hangs in the balance… I’m picking home court. I’m picking Latvia. I’m picking them to leave this tournament with the gold.

Cordeiro: One of the best offensive systems in the tournament, everyone knows their role and their off-ball movement is off the charts. This allows them to break down defenses and create easy buckets.

Defense, however, has been an issue in their last three games, where they’ve allowed around 90 points per game (outside of that OT game against Lithuania). Italy really exposed them defensively with a playing style somewhat similar to Latvia’s. On offense, when their shots aren’t falling, they look like a regular team that struggles to score inside.

Still, expect them to improve as the tournament goes on. This roster is built to last, and with each knockout game, they should get sharper. Plus, playing at home gives them an extra edge that could make a real difference.

 

4. Italy (André 5, Cordeiro 3. Score = 8)

 

 

André: Italy has been the preseason darlings: undefeated, blowing out quality opponents and looking like the most cohesive team outside of Tier 1. Simone Fontecchio has led, but what makes Italy dangerous is that they don’t need one savior. They move, they share, they punish mistakes.

I project them to win Group C, reach the semifinals, and then fall short of a medal in the Bronze Game. That places them firmly in my second tier of medal contenders alongside France, Slovenia, Lithuania, Turkey and Greece. I give Slovenia a better shot at beating one of the Top 3 in an elimination game, which is why I rank them ahead, but I expect Italy to play at a very high level being in my top 5 heading into this tournament. Range: 4–8 reflects their solid floor and ability to make a deep run, though a slip in a knockout game could push them toward the lower end.

Cordeiro: Am I crazy? This might be Italy’s best chance to actually win something. The meeting of two generations brings both irreverence and a lot of experience. This is a team that can drag you into their chaotic style of play, they’re not afraid to make the game as ugly as it gets. You can expect full-court zone presses, different zone looks, and overall chaotic defensive schemes.

Offensively, it’s a completely different story. Their smart bigs are always looking for space to operate, while the guards consistently apply rim pressure and mix it with playmaking. Fontecchio raises their ceiling, he not only creates for himself but also frees up his teammates with his off-ball movement and even on-ball creation at this level.

The only thing they’re really missing is size in the frontcourt. Melli is smart, and Diop and Niang bring athleticism, but they lack a true rim-running big who can provide reliable rim protection.

 

5. France (André 6, Cordeiro 4. Score = 10)

 

 

André: No Wembanyama. No Gobert. That’s the reality. And yet: perfect in warmups. The talent is still there: athleticism, depth and switchability. The questions are about experience and creation. FIBA basketball doesn’t usually reward youth-heavy cores and this group might struggle with consistency. I believe Luka can pick them apart in group play, and even Israel might give them headaches. France belongs in this tier because everything could click, but you wouldn’t bet on it game after game.

France is a team built on athleticism and depth, but the “intangible” here is their identity. They’ve traditionally been a team defined by their rim protection and physical defense with Wembanyama and Gobert as the anchor. Without them, their defensive mindset has to shift dramatically. Can their young, athletic core find a new identity on that end of the floor?

And in late-game situations, who is the leader that demands the ball and dictates the offense? These aren’t things you can see on a stat sheet, but they’re the difference between a team that fizzles out in the quarterfinals and one that finds a way to win a medal.

I project them to finish second in Group D, but fall in the quarterfinals. They’re in my second tier of legit medal contenders, but near the bottom of that cluster due to the lack of experience. Range: 4–8 reflects their potential if everything clicks, though their inexperience and lack of star anchors could easily see them exit earlier.

Cordeiro: If Wemby, Gobert, and Fournier were here, France would be a top-2 team for sure. But with all the injuries in the frontcourt, the players who stayed don’t inspire too much confidence in me. Jaiteh is the only guy who doesn’t shy away from contact, but against bigger and better bigs, he will get exposed. Alex Sarr’s ability to stretch the floor doesn’t fit as well here, because spacing isn’t as valuable compared to the NBA game.

Their defense does have real upside, they can press full court and throw multiple lineups at you. But they haven’t been tested enough against bigger teams, and Willy Hernangómez took too many advantages inside against them. That’s a big red flag for when they face dominant bigs.

So why are they still ranked higher than some of the bigger teams? It comes down to firepower and versatility. They can play every style, and their on-ball defense will give nightmares to anyone.

 

6. Lithuania (André 8, Cordeiro 6. Score = 14)

 

 

André: Beating Latvia in overtime during preparation was a statement. Lithuania will still lean on size and muscle to grind games down, and they have the discipline to win rock fights. The missing piece is guard creation. Without it, they’ll hit a ceiling against the very best. But in any game, they’ll make you earn every inch.

I’ve them on my second tier of medal outsiders with Italy, France, Slovenia, Turkey and Greece. I project them to finish 2nd in Group B and reach the quarterfinals, where their lack of creation will likely cap their run. Range: 4–10 reflects their solid fundamentals and ability to grind games, though their limited guard creation could prevent a deeper medal run.

Cordeiro: I wasn’t that high on them to be honest. But their preparation games? They’ve been something else, flawless, cohesive, undefeated. Every player knows their role. I had doubts about a creator on the ball, but Jokubaitis has been shutting me up, and if he keeps that up, it gives them the spark they desperately needed.

JV might just be the second most dominant center in this tournament. He’s a reliable scoring option, and defenses will naturally gravitate toward him, leaving open looks for others. Valančiūnas, though, remains a defensive weak spot in pick-and-roll coverage. And when their shooters struggle, the offense can get congested, predictable, even a little suffocating.

Sure, maybe they’re overperforming, and maybe this level of play isn’t sustainable. But for now? They deserve their flowers. Their preparation games have been a statement, and you can’t ignore that kind of rhythm going into a tournament.

 

7. Slovenia (André 4, Cordeiro 11. Score = 15)

 

 

André: The good news: Luka Dončić is fine after his scare against Latvia. The bad news: Vlatko Čančar and Josh Nebo are out. That’s a huge hit for their fragile depth. Slovenia lands here because Luka is the ultimate ceiling-raiser. He can single-handedly drag them through games no one else could win. But the cast around him isn’t quite strong enough to lift Slovenia into the top tier, especially against the heavyweights.

I expect a quarterfinal exit, not because Luka will shrink, but because eventually the margin for error disappears. Still, in terms of a puncher’s chance to win a medal I’ve them at the top of this tier of teams. I project them to win Group D, ride Luka’s brilliance to the quarterfinals, and then bow out against Latvia. They remain in my second tier, a half-step below the top three. Range: 3–9 reflects Luka’s ability to lift them in bursts, though roster gaps make a deeper run unlikely.

Cordeiro: Too Doncic-dependent, which locks them into the No. 11 spot. There are simply too many issues holding them back: no true rim protector, very little creation outside of Doncic and Prepelic, and a lack of reliable shooters to space the floor around him.

Doncic is their only real chance to compete and stay relevant. If he goes down with an injury or even has an off night (knock on wood), this team doesn’t have the tools to survive.

 

8. Finland (André 10, Cordeiro 5. Score = 15)

 

 

André: Lauri Markkanen dropped 42 on Poland, which is both exhilarating and a little alarming, because Finland needs him to do exactly that to stay competitive. If Lauri is brilliant, they can win a game against almost anyone. If he’s merely good, they’re out.

Despite that they are a good and well run team, I expect them to deliver good performances, I just don’t expect them to have the consistency and experience to make a deep run and be in contention for medals.

I project them as a tough out, finishing 3rd in Group B and falling to Latvia in the Round of 16. They’re Tier 3, dangerous in a one-off but not built for a medal run. Range: 9–12 reflects their ability to steal a game, though their lack of depth and consistency makes a deep run unlikely.

Cordeiro: It might be too soon to rank this team this high since they’re still so young, but Lauri is that type of player, a top-3 scorer in this tournament whose versatility and dominance push them into 5th place. Even though they’re inexperienced, the team is built around Lauri, and he can score from anywhere in every way possible. Offensively, they’ll be dangerous because they share the ball well, which allows them to generate better looks as defenses collapse on Lauri.

Honestly, Lauri could justify ranking them even higher, but they’re missing a true rim protector to pair with him and let him play full-time at the 4. As dominant as he is, they’ll eventually need more defensively than what Markkanen alone can provide. And of course, in EuroBasket, every game and every possession carries extra weight, so their youth and inexperience are legitimate concerns.

 

9. Greece (André 7, Cordeiro 10. Score = 17)

 

 

André: Giannis Antetokounmpo changes everything. With him, Greece is at least a threat to medal. Without him, they’re just a solid team with no real bite. The presence of Giannis makes Greece a threat, but the roster’s “effective field goal percentage” without him on the floor is a real problem.

They often struggle to get high-quality shots, relying on isolation play that a top-tier defense can easily shut down. The question isn’t just how well Giannis fits, but how the team’s “points per possession” metric drops when he’s on the bench and more importantly how well the team fits around him. He can raise the ceiling, but a lack of a cohesive offensive system around him means their floor could be lower than you’d expect for a team with a talent of his level.

I project them to finish 2nd in Group C, then edge out Israel in the Round of 16 before running into Germany in the quarterfinals. Tier 2 team, but closer to the bottom than the top. Range: 6–12 reflects Giannis’s ability to elevate them, but the roster limitations and reliance on his presence cap consistency and ceiling.

Cordeiro: Giannis has become more adapted to these types of FIBA competitions, and he will be their go-to guy on both ends of the floor. He’ll anchor the defense while serving as the centerpiece on offense. Compared to last year, he’ll have more talent around him with players like Sloukas and Dorsey.

Spacing will be key, surrounding Giannis with reliable three-point shooting is essential, but they may not have enough guys capable of hitting 35–37% from deep. That makes their defense even more important. If they can defend at a high level, it will fuel transition opportunities, and that’s where they can rack up easy points.

 

10. Turkey (André 9, Cordeiro 9. Score = 18)

 

 

André: Turkey hasn’t found a way to consistently organize its individual pieces. Losses to Germany and Lithuania underline the gap between talent and cohesion. Şengün can dominate offensively, Adem Bona could add defensive bite, but will he even get the role big enough to matter? Turkey’s range is wide: they could look like a top-4 team in one game and a Tier 3 group in the next.

Turkey’s biggest intangible is their “cohesion.” They have incredible pieces, but it often looks like they’re playing a series of one-on-one possessions rather than a fluid team offense. This can often be a sign of a lack of trust in the coaching staff or a clash of egos among the players. While Şengün’s low-post brilliance is undeniable, the team’s ability to play with a shared purpose, moving the ball for an open look rather than just passing to the best player, will be the true test of their success.

They’ll need to figure things out quickly. Larkin’s experience helps, but their projected high-minutes players lead to defensive questions that can be exploited by the top teams in this tournament and expose them in any given game.

I’ve them in my third tier with teams that have a chance to contend for a medal, they are volatile but talented. I project them to finish 3rd in Group A, upset Lithuania in the Round of 16, and then lose a close one to Italy in the quarterfinals. Range: 7–12 reflects their upside in a one-off and the high floor volatility that keeps them a long-shot medal contender.

Cordeiro: Turkey is still searching for their rhythm and the best way to play. They’ve looked solid so far, but they lack a clear system and set plays that maximize their top players. Cedi has the ball in his hands too much for the level of production he’s giving, and Ataman needs to figure out that part of their offense.

Bona has become an underrated piece, he brings defensive tenacity and verticality, but defense as a whole remains their main issue. As dominant as Bona can be, he needs the other four guys to be more cohesive around him.

Talent and depth alone make this team deserving of the No. 9 spot in my Power Rankings.

 

11. Israel (André 11, Cordeiro 8. Score = 19)

 

 

André: Deni Avdija leads a guard-heavy squad that can punish careless opponents. But without interior presence, they’re exposed against strong bigs. The loss to Estonia underlined their volatility. Israel should be consistent but it is hard for me to see them having a deep run.

I project them to finish 3rd in Group D, fight Greece hard in the Round of 16, but ultimately fall short. Tier 3, dangerous but capped. Range: 9–12 reflects their ability to compete in a one-off while acknowledging the limitations without interior presence and depth.

Cordeiro: The top-end talent here is impressive, Avdija might be the best wing in the tournament outside of Franz Wagner. They do lack physicality inside (besides Sorkin), but their frontcourt still provides plenty on offense. Everyone can shoot, react quickly, and make smart off-ball plays, which consistently creates easy buckets.

Madar can push the pace, and Deni thrives in that kind of game. This versatility, combined with the fact that Deni is surrounded by players who fit his style so well, makes me believe they deserve the No. 8 spot in my Power Rankings.

 

12. Spain (André 12, Cordeiro 13. Score = 25)

 

 

André: This year’s Spain is a pure test of the “Scariolo System.” It’s less about individual brilliance and more about collective discipline. On offense, they will likely run a very deliberate pace, using constant off-ball movement, back cuts and staggered screens to create the one or two open looks they need. The key for Spain isn’t just scoring, but not turning the ball over and milking every second off the shot clock. On defense, their identity is built on communication and team rotations.

They’ll try to clog the paint and force contested outside shots. It’s a high-floor, low-ceiling approach, but if any coach can turn a group of role players into a knockout-round threat, it’s Scariolo.

I project them 3rd in Group C, where they’ll get France in the Round of 16 and likely bow out. Tier 3, steady but not spectacular. Range: 9–12 reflects their disciplined, high-floor approach while acknowledging the limited ceiling of this roster.

Cordeiro: This is the lowest they’ve ever been in any Power Rankings. With or without Santi Aldama, they belong here, though there’s some upside for improvement since they’ve been playing fairly well. The team shares the ball effectively, the Hernangómez brothers are performing like it’s EuroBasket 2022, and Yusta is shooting at a high clip.

However, depth, lack of size, and limited overall talent could become major problems against stronger opponents. Defensively, expect them to be elite, Scariolo can run defensive clinics, which might pay off in the long run (whatever “long run” means in a knockout-heavy tournament).

That said, their margin for error is extremely thin.

 

13. Georgia (André 13, Cordeiro 12. Score = 25)

 

 

André: This team will make life miserable physically. The Mamukelashvili–Bitadze pairing is imposing, and Toko Shengelia adds creative punch. They won’t quit, but talent-wise, they’re capped when compared to the top teams despite that Kamar Baldwin, Duda Sanadze and Giorgi Shermadini gives them just enough when compared to other teams within this range.

I project them 4th in Group C, enough to make the Round of 16 before falling to Slovenia. Tier 4, fighting for a knockout spot. Range: 13–17 captures their ability to compete in the group stage but acknowledges the talent ceiling against stronger opponents. From all teams on tier 4, they are the only that I believe can beat on of the top12 teams on a good night.

Cordeiro: If you want to compete, you need a top-tier center. Georgia has two, plus Mamukelashvili, which makes them a competitive squad. Their biggest challenges will be spacing and on-ball creation. Kamar Baldwin will need to get creative to bring out the best in this team.

Three-point shooting is somewhat guaranteed by Sandro and Duda Sanadze, but is it enough? Creation remains a problem, so they’ll rely heavily on Shengelia’s playmaking abilities. Their overall record this summer hasn’t been great, they lost all five games leading up to August 20, so qualifying for the knockout phase could be a headache given that form.

Still, their top four players Mamukelashvili, Baldwin, Toko, and Goga make them a team to watch, with the potential to fight for something meaningful beyond just making the knockout stage.

 

14. Poland (André 14, Cordeiro 14. Score = 28)

 

 

André: A reminder of their fragility: Markkanen torched them for 42. Jordan Loyd and Mateusz Ponitka will have to deliver if Poland wants to sneak out of the group, at home I expect them to do so.

I project them 4th in Group D, which means a tough draw vs. Italy in the Round of 16. That’s where their run ends. Tier 4, fighting for a knockout spot. Range: 13–17 reflects their ability to reach the Round of 16 but limited upside beyond that.

Cordeiro: Playing at home gives them a noticeable boost, but they remain fragile. They’ve given up a lot of points in nearly every preparation game, though they’ve recently picked up wins against Georgia and Sweden.

Sochan would have improved their defense, so his absence will be felt, they’ll likely continue to struggle defensively. Lloyd, on the other hand, provides much-needed support to Ponitka as an on-ball creator and allows Ponitka to focus more on off-ball duties, creating mismatches inside.

Overall, expect them to get out of the group stage.

 

15. Montenegro (André 15, Cordeiro 16. Score = 31)

 

 

André: Nikola Vučević is a legit difference maker. The issue is that once he’s neutralized, there’s no real Plan B. The frontcourt should deliver but backcourt creation is a must and they will need to find that spark sooner rather than later.

I project them 4th in Group B, which gives them Serbia in the Round of 16. That’s basically the end of the road. Tier 4, fighting for a knockout spot. Range: 13–17, reflecting their likely finish in the Round of 16 but limited upside beyond that.

Cordeiro: Their top-tier center is their biggest weapon. Vucevic provides outside shooting and can score 20+ points efficiently. The supporting cast, however, is a major concern. Alltman is their rookie import and will need to fill Perry’s shoes; from what we’ve seen, it could be a rough road, especially with turnovers and mistakes in crunch time.

Defensively, the team struggles, Vucevic tends to shy away from physicality, and their perimeter defense is weak. Still, Vucevic gives them a fighting chance against any team in their group, outside of Germany. For a deeper run, though, Alltman will need to bring his A-game.

 

16. Bosnia and Herzegovina (André 17, Cordeiro 16. Score = 33)

 

 

André: Dzanan Musa’s surgery looms large. With him, Bosnia has offensive punch. Without him, they’re just fighting uphill and might drop both in the tournament and on these Power Rankings. Musa is out due to injury that takes away their engine and I dropped them from 16 to 17 being a close call between them and Czechia. As I don’t see Bosnia beating Italy, Greece, Spain nor Georgia. While I favor Montenegro and Portugal to be 4th on their groups making them below of them in these power rankings because of the expected outcome, but talent wise they would rank ahead of these teams but the lack of Musa’s creation is too big of a blow.

I project them 5th in Group C, which means elimination in the group stage. Tier 4, fighting for a knockout spot. Range: 16–17, reflecting their likely finish at the bottom of their group without Musa nor Garza.

Cordeiro: With or without Musa, they belong here. They’re more than just one player creating, and their frontcourt now carries a bigger offensive role. Expect better looks from three as Nurkic kicks out and with good shooters around him plus smart off-ball movement, they function well as a team.

On the downside, their slow-footed center (and currently out-of-shape) could be exposed against teams like Italy, and on-ball creation remains a concern. Still, they’ve had multiple double-digit scorers, and having NBA talent on the roster will boost their scoring potential.

 

17. Portugal (André 16, Cordeiro 17. Score = 33)

 

 

André: They shocked Slovenia in qualifying and have Neemias Queta as a real anchor inside on both ends of the court. Portugal has a real shot to sneak into knockouts if everything breaks right and they perform in the right games.

I project them 4th in Group A, which gives them Germany in the Round of 16. They’ll bow out there, but just making the knockouts is already a statement. Tier 4, competitive but capped. Range: 16–17.

Cordeiro: Neemias Queta might be a new “cheat code” for EuroBasket. He’s a high-flying big who brings physicality, supported by a cast that adds defensive intensity and can create on the perimeter. They may lack consistent creation beyond their primary ball-handlers, and they haven’t been tested enough against teams above their Power Ranking position, Portugal’s only challenge so far was a hard-fought win over Spain.

Their three-point shooting has been falling, but whether it’s sustainable remains to be seen.

 

18. Czechia (André 18, Cordeiro 18. Score = 36)

 

 

André: A proud program now in transition. Tomas Satoransky brings steadiness, Vit Krejci adds hope, but the talent gap is too wide. At the same time you can’t disregard their experience and I believe it is a close call between them and Portugal, a must-watch game that might very well decide the 4th place in Group A.

I project them 5th in Group A, just missing the cut. Tier 4, solid effort but ultimately capped. Range: 17–18.

Cordeiro: A predictable team, but experienced enough for these competitions. Satoranský pushes the pace and acts as a true floor general, providing guidance on offense, without him, the team looks very different.

They lack a rim protector, which could be an issue in their group, and defensively they have some clear weaknesses. Their pick-and-roll coverage relies heavily on traditional drop schemes and recovers slowly.

On the bright side, Krejčí and Satoranský form a legitimate backcourt duo who bring size and take advantage inside. Surrounding them is a team that shoots 37% from three, giving them enough firepower to compete if their defense improves even slightly.

Edit: Satoranský has been ruled out of EuroBasket due to back issues. While the team would normally project in the 18–20 range alongside squads like Sweden or a healthy Estonia, their chances of reaching the knockout stage take a major hit with his absence.

19. Sweden (André 20, Cordeiro 19. Score = 39)

 

 

André: Sweden’s fate rests on Pelle Larsson being able to elevate their level of play. They have the upside to push Montenegro, but the margins are razor thin, and I lean Portugal over them as having a better chance to move into the knockout stages. No Bobi Klintman means less upside, he left as he keeps rehabbing from injury.

I project them 5th in Group B, narrowly behind Montenegro. Tier 4, talent limited and upside capped. Range: 17–19.

Cordeiro: It might sound harsh, but I had them ranked much higher on the podcast. Their frontcourt issues remain unresolved and likely won’t be fixed. They’ve lost to Portugal, Poland and Montenegro, and while Larsson provides a scoring punch alongside Pantzar, there’s little creation beyond them. Klintman won’t be available, and he would have been their frontcourt hope.

Larsson is their only player elevating their ceiling, standing out as one of the best guards in Sweden’s group. Bottom line: Montenegro now has a better chance to qualify for the knockout phase.

 

20. Estonia (André 19, Cordeiro 21. Score =40)

 

 

André: Estonia’s scrappy, their win over Israel in prep was a nice indicator of their competitive edge. They rely heavily on Maik-Kalev Kotsar, and he delivers, but he can’t do it on his own. This group plays hard, executes their sets, and will hang around with mid-tier teams, but the margin for error is razor-thin. Kotsar availability changes everything.

I project them 6th in Group C, competitive but limited. Tier 5, heavily reliant on Kotsar, with upside capped by depth and injuries. Range: 18–23.

Cordeiro: A scrappy team for sure, and I consider them a tier above the previous teams. Their go-to guy, however, is a center playing slightly out of position and acting as the primary playmaker for others. With recent updates, it’s unclear if he will play; if not, Belgium might belong in the same ranking spot but a tier lower. That said, their surrounding pieces know exactly what they’re doing when the team leans on ball movement and spacing.

 

21. Iceland (André 21, Cordeiro 20. Score = 41)

 

 

André: They can shoot. That’s their puncher’s chance. But once opponents crowd them, the lack of depth shows.

I project them 5th in Group D, competitive in spurts but ultimately out. Tier 5, limited depth, upside capped. Range: 21–23.

Cordeiro: They’ve been underperforming, but their big three is very strong. Hermansson gives them a clear go-to guy, capable of scoring 20 points when he wants. Tryggvi Hlinason anchors their defense with his shot-blocking, averaging three blocks per game. He underperformed against Neemias Queta, but against smaller teams like Sweden, he recorded a double-double.

They play well as a team, and their big three have strong chemistry, generating good looks while keeping turnovers low.

 

22. Belgium (André 22, Cordeiro 23. Score = 45)

 

 

André: Missing Camara, Mitchell, and Obasohan strips Belgium of what could have been a very intriguing core. That trio gave them versatility, ball-handling, and enough scoring to make things complicated for better teams. Without them, Belgium will grind defensively, they’ll rotate with discipline, but the lack of offensive solutions is glaring. They’ll have moments where their toughness shines, but there’s only so far a patchwork offense can carry you in a tournament this stacked.

I project them 6th in Group B, tough defensively but limited offensively. Tier 5, depth issues and missing key contributors cap their upside. Range: 21–23.

Cordeiro: The absences of Ajay, Obasohan, and Camara make this roster very thin and lacking in playmaking. Defenses might struggle with them, and while they are solid on-ball defensively, they lack a true rim protector. Add to that their scarcity of on-ball creation and against top-tier defenses, they might really struggle to generate offense.

 

23. Great Britain (André 23, Cordeiro 22. Score = 45)

 

 

André: A respectable qualifying run deserves credit, but this roster still lacks reliable creators beyond Quinn Ellis. The offense often stalls, relying too much on one or two players to make something happen late in the shot clock. Defensively, the rotations are a work in progress, and the lack of consistent rim protection leaves them vulnerable. They’ll show fight and maybe flash some shooting streaks, but sustaining that for 40 minutes against Europe’s elite is another story.

I project them 6th in Group D. Tier 5, competitive in stretches but limited by offensive creation and interior defense. Range: 21–23.

Cordeiro: They’ve struggled in recent friendly games, but I still rank them higher because of their size and the number of players capable of scoring. Defense could be an issue, as we’ve seen so far, but offensively they might have enough firepower to act as “one-game spoilers at best.

 

24. Cyprus (André 24, Cordeiro 24. Score = 48)

 

 

André: Hosting should be a celebration, and in many ways it is, but the roster is simply outmatched at this level. Darral Willis would be a massive help if he ends up joining after not showing up on the first announcement, but even with him, the ceiling is modest: keeping games respectable and avoiding blowouts. The energy in the gym will matter, but home-court advantage can only cover so many gaps. Cyprus is here to grow and showcase their basketball culture, not to win games.

I project them 6th in Group C. Tier 5, primarily developmental and here for experience; wins are unlikely. Range: 24.

Cordeiro: Bottom-end talent with virtually no experience in competitions like this, either at the club or national team level.

 

André’s Tournament Predictions

Group Predictions

Group A: 1. Serbia 2. Latvia 3. Turkey 4. Portugal 5. Czechia 6. Estonia

Group B: 1. Germany 2. Lithuania 3. Finland 4. Montenegro 5. Sweden 6. Great Britain

Group C: 1. Italy 2. Greece 3. Spain 4. Georgia 5. Bosnia & Herzegovina 6. Cyprus

Group D: 1. Slovenia 2. France 3. Israel 4. Poland 5. Iceland 6. Belgium

 

Bracket Predictions

Round of 16:

• Turkey vs. Lithuania – Pick: Turkey (close call)
• Italy vs. Poland – Pick: Italy
• Serbia vs. Montenegro – Pick: Serbia
• France vs. Spain – Pick: France (close call)
• Germany vs. Portugal – Pick: Germany
• Greece vs. Israel – Pick: Greece (competitive game)
• Latvia vs. Finland – Pick: Latvia (competitive game)
• Slovenia vs. Georgia – Pick: Slovenia (hard-fought game)

Quarter-Finals:

• Italy vs. Turkey – Pick: Italy
• Serbia vs. France – Pick: Serbia
• Germany vs. Greece – Pick: Germany
• Latvia vs. Slovenia – Pick: Latvia (With Luka going for 50+!)

Semi-Finals:

• Serbia vs. Italy – Pick: Serbia
• Latvia vs. Germany – Pick: Latvia (high-scoring, competitive and hard fought game)

Bronze Medal Game:

• Germany vs. Italy – Pick: Germany

Gold Medal Game:

• Latvia vs. Serbia – Pick: Latvia (hard-fought shoutout unless Serbia dominates rebounds)

 

 

Cordeiros’s Tournament Predictions

Group Predictions:

Group A: 1. Serbia 2. Latvia 3. Turkey 4. Portugal 5. Czechia 6. Estonia

Group B: 1. Germany 2. Finland 3. Lithuania 4. Montenegro 5. Sweden 6. Great Britain

Group C: 1. Italy 2. Greece 3. Georgia 4. Bosnia & Herzegovina 5. Spain 6. Cyprus

Group D: 1. France 2. Israel 3. Slovenia 4. Poland 5. Iceland 6. Belgium

 

Bracket Predictions

Round of 16:

• Turkey vs. Finland – Pick: Finland (close call)
• Italy vs. Poland – Pick: Italy (not close)
• Serbia vs. Montenegro – Pick: Serbia
• Israel vs. Georgia – Pick: Israel (closest call)
• Germany vs. Portugal – Pick: Germany
• Greece vs. Slovenia – Pick: Greece (not close)
• Latvia vs. Lithuania – Pick: Latvia (don’t fully trust Lithuania’s scorers)
• France vs. Bosnia & Herzegovina – Pick: France (France has the pace to outrun Bosnia & Herzegovina and with Yabusele spacing the floor, they can pull Nurkić out of the paint)

Quarter-Finals:

• Finland vs. Italy – Pick: Italy (likely until end or OT)
• Israel vs. Serbia – Pick: Serbia (not close)
• Germany vs. Greece – Pick: Germany
• Latvia vs. France – Pick: Latvia (France will consistently struggle with off-ball defense against Latvia)

 

Semi-Finals:

• Italy vs. Serbia – Pick: Serbia (no one can contain Jokic)
• Germany vs. Latvia – Pick: Latvia

 

Bronze Medal Game:

• Italy vs. Germany – Pick: Italy (high-scoring game)

 

Gold Medal Game:

• Serbia vs. Latvia – Pick: Serbia (Jokic dominant; Serbia can contain Latvia’s off-ball game)

 

 

This article was co-written by the hosts of the European Hoops podcast, Tiago Cordeiro and André Lemos. Subscribe to the podcast and follow European Hoops on Twitter: @EthosEuroleague.