Ah, the tired maxim of the spread offense’s alleged inability to get high school prospects into the NFL strikes again:

Speaking of recruiting — in this case the negative variety — check out this quote in the Palm Beach Post from Pahokee receiver De’Joshua Johnson.

“I dropped Florida and West Virginia because of the spread offense,” Johnson said. “I don’t want to play in the spread offense. I’ve seen how it affected receivers in the NFL draft.”

Johnson is reportedly leaning to Florida State and is considering Tennessee.

For his part, Pat Dooley has a decent and brief retort, though it comes off as Florida-homer rebuttal, rather than rebutting the actual claims themselves:

He might want to check his facts.

Didn’t Percy Harvin go in the first round? Chad Jackson? Meyer has had five receivers drafted from Florida during his tenure (six if you count Cornelius Ingram), the most for any school in the nation. FSU hasn’t had a first-round skill player in seven years and two receivers taken in the draft during Meyer’s tenure. Tennessee has had three during the same span.

This is a good start, but it doesn’t really hit the point at the very crux of this matter: You are what you are. Percy Harvin didn’t get drafted where he did because of the spread offense, he got drafted because he has Size X and Skill Set Y, which the NFL interprets as NFL Potential Z. Harvin has had Size X and Skill Set Y at his disposal, and would have had them regardless of where he went to college (we can debate the minor-ish point of a different strength coach at some other school helping Harvin achieve his potential to a different degree, but that’s outside of the discussion of offense – though I’d contend that some spread schemes demand a better strength coach).

The main things that an offensive scheme will affect are:

1. Production. Depending on the type of spread, a receiver may play a larger or smaller role in the offense, affecting production. One of the the things that the NFL might look at is “Well, he has X and Y, but his production hasn’t matched that. Does he have a good excuse for this, or does he not bring it on game day?” Spread offenses are even more creative in terms of ways to get receivers the ball, in Harvin/Johnson’s specific cases.
2. Preparation. Sure, a college QB who runs exclusively from the shotgun won’t be quite as ready to play right away in the NFL, and a receiver might run fewer or different routes, and have simpler reads of defenses playing in a spread offense. These players don’t come to the NFL ready to compete on day 1, perhaps. However, I’ll let Mike Leach take this one:

“I only need a three-hour window. I’ll have a great clinic for all the NFL coaches who are so horrible that they can’t teach a guy to take a snap under center and go backwards.”

Yeah, so Mike Leach is awesome, and an offensive scheme doesn’t have a huge effect on where a player is drafted (and oddly, this is especially true for receivers, whose responsibilities probably change the least out of anyone on the offense with a spread v. pro-style offense).

Let’s take a look at every receiver drafted in the 2009 NFL Draft. I’ll vaguely lump their college offensive schemes into “spread” and “pro-style.” This may seem a bit simplistic at first, but then, isn’t the criticism of the spread offense writ large simplistic itself?

Take a look at that! 13 Receivers from spread offenses and 17 from pro-style offenses were selected, with 4 from 1-AA teams, which I didn’t include because 1) I don’t know what type of offense most 1-AA schools run, and 2) If they’re taking a guy from a 1-AA school, offensive scheme is probably not on the forefront of NFL GMs’ decisions. Considering that more schools run a pro-style offense (particularly in power conferences, from which most NFL players are likely to come), that’s not bad at all. In the first round, the same number of players from each offensive type (3 apiece). When you consider that some schools that I placed in the “pro style” category also have some elements of spread offenses, such as Ohio State, LSU, and Oregon State, it’s a complete wash, at worst. And I guess that brings me back to my main point, which is not that the spread is inherently better for a wide receiver prospect’s chances of making it to the NFL, but rather than the offensive scheme on the whole is irrelevant.

So what’s the course of action? Obviously, a 17-year-old kid didn’t come up with this (bogus) assertion by himself. No, based on reputation, and the schools entering and exiting De’Joshua’s list, this almost certainly comes from one Lane Monte Kiffin. Of course, do I expect Rich Rodriguez to bore a kid to death with charts and whatnot? Probably not, but dispelling a meme, using whatever evidence is available, will certainly help.

Posted under Analysis, Coaching, Football, Recruiting

With the 2009 football season looming a mere 4+ months away, it’s as good a time as any to take a first look at Michigan’s upcoming schedule, and determine whether the teams the Wolverines will face this year should get better or worse (or remain the same) from last year to this. I also reserve the right to be completely wrong.

Western Michigan
2008 Record: 9-4 (6-2 MAC)
Key losses: S Louis Delmas, LB Austin Pritchard, WR Jamarko Simmons
Key returning players: QB Tim Hiller, RB Brandon West
Projection: Same. Sure, teams lose players to the NFL every year, but it’s not fair to the Broncos (nor would it be to basically any MAC team) to assume they’ll be able to replace a second-round pick in the secondary. However, the offense should really continue trucking behind the QB play of Tim Hiller. The Broncos should be about the same as they were last year, though they’ll rely even more heavily on a high-flying offense to make up for a much weaker defense.

Notre Dame
2008 Record: 7-6 (0-1 Syracuse)
Key losses: WR David Grimes, S David Bruton
Key returning players: QB Jimmy Clausen, RB Armando Allen, WR Golden Tate
Projection: Up. Based on roster composition alone, the Irish should be pretty rockin’ this year. One impoortant caveat: you could say that about the last two years as well, and they were somewhere between terrible and mediocre over each of the previous two seasons. Is Charlie Weis just one big, fat FAIL, or will he start to get the talent he has assembled to perform? There’s no excuse (lol book title/disingenuous motto) for the Irish to not beat up on most of their schedule this year.

Eastern Michigan
2008 Record: 3-9 (2-6 MAC)
Key losses: RB Terrence Blevins, WR Tyler Jones, LB Daniel Holtzclaw, S Jacob Wyatt
Key returning players: QB Andy Schmitt, WR Jacory Stone, LB Andre Hatchett
Projection: Up. The Eagles return some key pieces, though they also lose some important ones, the upgrade at the head coaching position appears to be a substantial one. Eastern was terrible last year, save the upset of Central Michigan in their final game of the year, and even anything approaching competency would be a leap in the right direction.

Indiana
2008 Record: 3-9 (1-7 Big Ten)
Key losses: RB Marcus Thigpen
Key returning players: QB Ben Chappell, QB/WR/? Kellen Lewis, WR/CB Ray Fisher
Projection: Same. You can tell the Indiana coaching staff is really grasping at straws in an effort to not get fired at the end of this year. They’re moving key players around (2nd-leading receiver Ray Fisher to corner, best offensive weapon Kellen Lewis all over the field, etc.), and completely revamping their schemes (reports say they’ve almost exclusively worked out of the pistol this spring). If it doesn’t work, Bill Lynch and co. are probably going to get the axe.

Michigan State
2008 Record: 9-4 (6-2 Big Ten)
Key losses: QB Brian Hoyer, RB Javon Ringer, S Otis Wiley
Key returning players: LB Greg Jones, WR Mark Dell
Projection: Down. The Spartans were beneficiaries of a bad Big Ten and some good luck last year. They were more like a 7-6 team than the 9-4 that they actually went. Take away 3 of their 4 most important players (the fourth is Jones), and they should be worse. Take away that luck, and they’re just a team. Adam Rittenberg will still predict that they win the National Championship.

Iowa
2008 Record: 9-4 (5-3 Big Ten)
Key losses: RB Shonn Greene, DTs Mitch King and Matt Kroul,
Key returning players: WR Andy Brodell, LBs Pat Angerer and Jeremiha Hunter, QB Ricky Stanzi
Projection: Same. The Hawkeyes lose arguably their three most important players in Greene (no, Rittenberg, you can’t just baselessly say “I think Jewel Hampton will be at least as good as they guy who won the Doak Walker Award”) and the defensive tackles. However, they upgrade slightly at almost every other position, and assuming they can stay healthier than they have in the past couple years, they should be about as good as they were in ’08. Of course last year, they were something of an anti-MSU, and lost a couple games they shouldn’t have. The Hawkeyes will be about the same quality of team, but the record may improve.

Delaware State
2008 Record: 5-6 (5-3 MEAC)
Key losses: QB Vashon Winton, RBs Chris Strother and Kareem Jones, LB Kevin Conner
Key returning players: DB Avery Grant, WR Laronne Moore
Projection: Down, down down. For a team that wasn’t even good to begin with, losing 3 of your top 5 tacklers, your 4-year starter at QB, and your top 3 running backs can be little other than a recipe for disaster. Delaware State is a true 1-AA cupcake, and will be even worse this year than they were in 2008.

Penn State
2008 Record: 11-2 (7-1 Big Ten)
Key losses: WRs Derrick Williams, Deon Butler, and Jordan Norwood, 3 offensive linemen
Key returning players: QB Daryll Clark, RBs Evan Royster and Stephfon Green, LB Sean Lee
Projection: Down. The Spread HD worked in 2008 because Clark was on-point all year, and the Lions had the skill position talent on the outside to force defenses to spread the whole field. With Clark tailing off in the last few games (albeit due to injury, perhaps), and the OL and wideouts gone, PSU won’t be the offensive force that they were last year. Defensively, the return of Sean Lee should help in the middle. However, the top 3 defensive ends left, and #4 is out for the season with a torn ACL.

Illinois
2008 Record: 5-7 (3-5 Big Ten)
Key losses: LB Brit Miller, CB Vontae Davis, WR Will Judson
Key returning players: QB Juice Williams, WR Arrelious Benn, LB Martez Wilson
Projection: Same. Like Iowa, the record might improve, but the team will be about as good in 2009. The offense should really click with a senior Juice Williams and junior Arrelious Benn, though you could have said the same last year (and the Illini were awesome at times, just horrifically inconsistent). The defense should take major steps back with its best two players, LB Brit Miller and Vontae Davis, gone and the third best player, LB Martez Wilson, doing things like getting stabbed in a bar during the offseason.

Purdue
2008 Record: 4-8 (2-6 Big Ten)
Key losses: QBs Curtis Painter and Justin Siller, RB Kory Sheets, WRs Greg Orton and Desmond Tardy, LB Anthony Heygood, S Torri Williams
Key returning players: S Joe Holland, QB Joey Elliott
Projection: Down. Purdue sucked last year, and nearly all of their best players are leaving town because their eligibility has expired (everyone but Siller) or because they cheat on exams (Siller). Couple all that with a transition to a new offensive scheme and a plan to rely on several true freshmen despite their lack of guru approval, and Danny Hope’s first year in West Lafayette may be a difficult one. There could be a coaching upgrade as Wilford Brimley had been mailing it in the past couple years, but there is basically no talent for the Boilers to work with.

Wisconsin
2008 Record: 7-6 (3-5 Big Ten)
Key losses: RB PJ Hill, TEs Garrett Graham and Travis Beckum, LB DeAndre Levy, LB Jonathan Casillas
Key returning players: QB Dustin Sherer, WRs David Gilreath and Nick Toon, LB Jaevery McFadden
Projection: Up. The Badgers were a team that lost plenty of games they shouldn’t have, and the important question for tham is whether that was bad luck or the horrifically bad coaching ability of Bret Bielema. The early appearances are a bit of both, so the Badgers should be a bit better, but not by leaps and bounds. Hill wasn’t even Wisconsin’s best RB for much of the year, and Sherer was the better QB, despite Allan Evridge starting the year under center. Simply getting the right pieces the ball more often should help. I think Bielema has a definite ceiling, especially with players he has recruited and coached for four year.

Ohio State
2008 Record: 10-3 (7-1 Big Ten)
Key losses: RB Beanie Wells, LBs James Laurinaitis and Marcus Freeman, CB Malcolm Jenkins, WRs Brian Robiskie and Brian Hartline
Key returning players: QB Terrelle Pryor, RB Dan Herron, CB Chimdi Chekwa
Projection: Down. The Buckeyes really should have been awesome last year, and might have been if Terrelle Pryor had started the whole year, and not been a true freshman. Alas, this was the case, and OSU’s last best chance at a national title for the next couple years leaves town with Beanie Wells and James Laurinaitis. Regardless, the Buckeyes are never going to fall completely off the map as long as Jim Tressel is the coach, so there’s a definite floor for their team. either way, they’ll take a significant step back in 2009.

Posted under Analysis, Football

OK, I don’t feel guilty doing it today, since there is plenty of good content already published and upcoming, and I don’t have an Unverified Voracity-like Substance to throw random interesting things into.

• After running a 10.44 100m dash last week, incoming freshman QB Denard Robinson ran a 10.28 over the weekend. At this pace, he should be teleporting to the finish line in 0 seconds by the time he gets to ann Arbor in the summer. So, as established, Mr. Robinson is fast. I would expect the coaches to have a package of plays designed for him to run this fall.
• After announcing his plans to transfer from the University of Miami, QB Robert Marve had Michigan on his list of five schools to which he would consider transferring. This was confusing to Michigan fans, because the Wolverines have little use for a pocket passer with 2 years of eligibility remaining. Rest easy, as he’s removed Michigan from his list of options, and replaced it with Arizona State. He cited “crowded QB situation” following the commitment of Devin Gardner, rather than the obvious “they probably couldn’t use my skill set.” Being afraid to beat out a true freshman (who is, by his own admission, a bit of a project) is something of a concern, especially for a guy who’s been the starter at his old school. Best of luck to Marve in the future. 
• After Brian’s discussion of GERG’s potential 3-4/4-3 hybrid mega-confusing defense, noted X-and-Os expert GSimmons85 has given it his shot to educate the Michigan fandom on defensive fronts, alignments, and what it all might mean for the Wolverines’ D next year. 
• Michigan Sports Center keeps you update with Alumni Flag Game rosters.
• In the St. Paul Pioneer Press, you can find a truly touching story about former Michigan baseball player Mike Watters, his son’s struggle with cancer, and his meeting of a parentless young cancer patient named Victor (via MVictors).
• Maize N Brew Dave gives his take on what the death of the Ann Arbor News might mean for the Michigan blogosphere, and how the role of the blog is likely to change fairly radically in the very near future. His take seems a little more dire than I might expect, and I think blogs will continue having the same ability to come up with content that we do now, but perhaps with even more access, which is definitely a good thing. Be honest, how often do most Michigan blogs link the AA News as the basis for an entire post? Not very frequently, in my memory. Maybe a Jim Carty column or two from back in the day, but that’s about it.

Posted under Analysis, Baseball, Coaching, Football, Spring Coverage

With the Upon Further Review series, I attempted to dissect the performance of individuals and lineups throughout Michigan’s basketball season. Though I didn’t start until halfway through the year (and didn’t UFR the last couple games), the aggregation of all the data may help us learn a bit more about the Michigan basketball team this season. Once football spring practice is over, I may go back to all the games I didn’t UFR, and get the plus/minus data for every game, which could certainly teach us something about the effectiveness of different combinations. For now, however, I’ll just add up the shooting data for each player over the course of the games UFRed.

Games included: Iowa III, Purdue II, Iowa II, Minnesota I, Northwestern II, Michigan State, UConn, Purdue I, Minnesota II, Wisconsin II, Ohio State II, Northwestern I, Ohio State I, Penn State I, Illinois II, Iowa I, Indiana, Illinois I, Oakland, Wisconsin I, NC Central

Individual Players

The overwhelming majority of Stu’s shots came from the outside (which is not surprising at all). What is somewhat surprising is how infrequently he jacked up bad looks. Expect his chart to look pretty different next year, as the departure of every point guard currently on the roster will force Stu to play a little more point.

The casual Michigan Basketball fan can’t hate Zack Gibson enough (and there are a few legitimate reasons to not like his game), but he is actually a pretty darned good player at times. He can be a defensive liability, which obviously isn’t indicated on this chart, and he’s never going to dominate anyone offensively, but he is the quintessential role player.

The striking thing about Manny’s chart, especially in relation to everyone else on the team, is his shot selection. He shots a whole hell of a lot of bad looks. The reasons for this are multiple, and some are Manny’s fault, whereas others aren’t. Things that are his fault? Obviously, he needs to improve his recognition of what he’s getting himself into as he drives the lane, and not go for it, or dish after driving. Even when he gets up in the air, he can get enough hangtime to hopefully pass out. He also shoots a lot of poor 3-pointers, though he seemed to develop a touch for making them towards the end of the year (sadly, not encapsulated in this chart). Things that aren’t his fault include having to carry the load on offense, getting stuck with the vast majority of the team’s last-second chucks to beat the shot clock, not being able to draw a foul call to save his life (those are in the chart as “1” attempts, even though many of them were definitely deserving of a call). With a hopefully improved roster next year, some of the external factors will go away completely or be reduced, and Manny could really improve his offensive efficiency.

He was never meant to be an offensive player, and his (in)ability to consistently shoot bears out why.

After a blazing start to the season, he hit something of a wall (as did the other two freshmen), shooting more and more poorly over the course of the season, with a few excellent games mixed in. Next year, he’ll probably have to play more of a slashing PG-type role, which he actually did very well at times this year, to the point where I was begging for it in certain games toward the end of the year.

I will repeat again that all three freshmen had their hot games and slumps. Novak is probably the most prone to this, because he was playing a position in which he was a physical underdog in every game, and was getting the hell beaten out of him on a regular basis. Next year, hopefully Cronin, Morgan, and McLimans will be able to give the team a little more size on a consistent basis, and Zack will be able to move to a more natural position.

I don’t think I went an entire UFR of a game Shepherd played in one time this year without making the following statement: “Quintessential Jevohn Shepherd. He shows off his great athleticism and stunning lack of basketball ability all at once.”

Among shots that fans can reasonably expect him to make (that is, those graded “2” or “3”), he shoots ridiculously well. He also did a much better job than the team’s other star, Manny, of choosing his shots wisely. He would take big post defenders out toward the perimeter, or post up smaller mismatches. Sims has one more year to get even better, and with more big men on next year’s team, hopefully be entirely dominant next year.

At one point late in the season, he was actually leading the team in 3-point percentage. Like Lee, this sort of analysis isn’t going to make him look like a great player, because he does so little on offense.

This graph surprises me, because Kelvin was one of the few players on this team that I was absolutely convinced would make the shot any time I saw him shoot an open 3. His loss will be lamented, because it hurts Michigan in terms of PG depth (currently: none).

Man, I’m so over talking shit about Anthony Wright. His awesome performance in the Oklahoma game is not charted here, but he actually wasn’t as much of a “see the ball, shoot the ball” player as I’ve criticized him for (at least not in the second half of the season, when his minutes dropped off, which is what I’ve charted here).

One hundred million dollars of awesome. Puls made his first like 5 three-pointers, which also happened to be his first 5 field goal attempts. If he can get Barwisized in the off-season (seriously: have him work out with the football team), he could contribute down the road, because dude can certainly shoot.

Posted under Analysis, Baseball, Basketball, Misc.

Or: Tim’s foray into tempo-free statistics.

Michigan takes on the Sooners of Oklahoma at 5:50 PM tonight on CBS in the second round of the NCAA tournament. The game takes place in Kansas City, Missouri at the Sprint Center.

Tempo-Free and efficiency comparison (if you need an explanation of what any of these things mean, head to KenPom’s website):

Differences of more than 100 places in the rankings garner two-letter advantages, differences of more than 200 get a third.

Oklahoma is going to be a big favorite in this game, as should be expected of a 2-seed going up against a 10-seed. The Sooners are better than Michigan in nearly every facet of the game. In fact, the only area in which Michigan is expected to be better is not turning the ball over themselves. This means the Wolverines absolutely must hold onto the rock (and they did a decent job against Clemson), and hit the shots that they have open. Of course, the paint is going to be a very troublesome area for Michigan, as even Clemson’s non-all-everything players were able to get theirs and more from the lane. Oklahoma’s advantage in rebounding is surprisingly small to me, especially following the dismal performance on the defensive glass against Clemson. KenPom predicts a 73-67 Clemson win in a 65-possession game.

EEK! Blake Griffin! Who is the last guy that this Michigan team, what with their small size and inability to match up well in the paint wants? Why, a center who happens to be the leading candidate for most Player of the Year Awards! DeShawn Sims and Zack Gibson’s ability to defend Griffin without fouling too much is of paramount importance in this game. Because of that, I expect to see a lot of 2-3 zone. The only other Sooners I know off the top of my head are Griffin’s “big” brother Taylor, and that point guard with the hideous hair decisions on both head and chin.

Yeah, so this is a really, really bad matchup for Michigan. I want to delude myself into thinking Michigan can win, but there’s no way I can convince the rational side of me. The success of the 2-3 zone is encouraging, and Oklahoma’s smaller rotation (only 7 players get significant playing time) certainly helps. Considering Griffin has been beat up of late, suffering a concussion against Texas toward the end of the regular season, and getting flagrantly fouled Thursday against Morgan State, the Sooners may wish they had spent more of the year developing depth. However, I’d rather predict a Michigan loss and be pleasantly surprised when they win than predict a win (foolishly) and be disappointed and wrong if they lose. So yeah, Michigan might be able to make this one close, but I really see this as a matchup of doom.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

With Michigan in the NCAA Tournament for the first time in 11 years, it’s finally time for breaking down the potential opponents, matchups, and out very own Wolverines for Match Madness. A great new tool that gives you the ability to do all this and more comes from BracketBrains, a cool site that has all sorts of comparisons and statistical analysis to help you figure out our team’s chances for success.

The unfortunate part of this site is that, like many of the best things in life, it isn’t free. There are several subscription options, ranging from $10-100, each with different access to their variety of features.

The pick for the Clemson game gives the Wolverines a 46.4% chance to win by one metric, and 41.0% chance by the other. Two predictions of the final score by BracketBrains have Michigan losing by scores of 74.6-71.0 and 73.4-68.4. Should they advance, the odds against Oklahoma are pretty dire, indeed.

It’s a really cool site if you’re willing to shell out the cash, and I encourage you to give it a look-see, even if you don’t end up buying.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Or: Tim’s foray into tempo-free statistics.

Michigan takes on the Illinois Fightin’ Illini tonight at 6:30 PM (EDT) in Indianapolis. The second-round Big Ten Tourney game is important to Big Dance seeding, though the first-round win over Iowa has likely solidified a tournament bid. Wolverines fans can see the game on the Big Ten Network.

Tempo-Free and efficiency comparison (if you need an explanation of what any of these things mean, head to KenPom’s website):

Differences of more than 100 places in the rankings garner two-letter advantages, differences of more than 200 get a third. The stats are only through the regular season, where KenPom’s data comes to an end.

When Last We Met…

DeShawn Sims and Manny Harris (though he was Michigan’s lone scoring threat in the second half, more on this later) both struggled against a lineup boasting size much better than the Wolverines (The Illini are, on average, an inch and a alf taller than Michigan. This is a bigger deal than it sounds). The since-marginalized Kelvin Grady and Laval-Lucas Perry kept Michigan in the game in Assembly Hall. Michigan’s offense, entering its “dark period” of the season, managed almost no second half offense, and the Wolverines lost the game, despite holding a halftime lead.

Since Last We Met…

Michigan went from “damn good nonconference team” to “meh” conference team, going 6-9 the rest of the regular season until the BTT tourney win against Iowa. The offense (and, for quite some time, defense) went dormant for much of the year, but has reemerged recently, to give Michigan fans some hope that John Beilein may indeed be all he’s cracked up to be. DeShawn Sims, crappy the last time these two teams met, has been ridiculously good in the last two games.

The Illini went 8-6 in the remainder of their conference schedule, though their biggest win was a home win against Purdue back in the beginning of February. They have lost their last two games (they had a bye in the first round of the Big Ten Tournament), and come into this game having gone cold, especially considering they have choked away late leads in two games against Penn State in their last 5. Also, Chester Frazier got hurt, which is very important.

And…?

Michigan is in the tournament at this point, barring absolute catastrophe in other conferences’ tournaments. However, this game is certainly important for improving their seeding. Michigan went through a rough stretch at the beginning of the conference season, but they’ve mostly snapped out of it, excepting the horrifically-officiated game at Iowa. Illinois has been solid all year, but they’ve fallen off somewhat towards the end of the year. This is where the important stuff kicks in:

Chester Frazier, an offensive non-factor but ridiculously important piece for the Illini defense, got hurt this week, and is not expected to play against Michigan. Though Manny wasn’t the primary liability for Michigan against Illinois the second time around (DeShawn was), if he’s freed up at all, he’ll draw an additional defender away from his teammates, giving all of them more open looks if Frazier doesn’t play, or even if he’s limited in any significant way. This is very good for Michigan.

Taking into account all the above factors, in addition to the fact that home court advantage for Illinois (and just about every team in the Big Ten) is far more important to their team than is home court advantage for Michigan, I think the Wolverines have a pretty good shot. All that said, I still am not confident about the Wolverines leaving Conseco with a win.

KenPom doesn’t make predictions for the conference tournaments (primarily because they aren’t listed on the teams’ schedules). To Vegas, Michigan is a single-digit dog – 2.5 points at last check – at the neutral site, and that prediction sounds pretty good (accuracy-wise, not what I’m hoping for) to me.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Shooting data can be found in .xls format here.

Half 1

Half 2

Individual Players

On a day when Michigan blows out the opponent on the strength of ridiculous performances from the big 2, Stu wasn’t noticeable.

On a day where Michigan wins running away, a non-positive differential would typically be a bad sign. However, Sims was the main reason for the blowout victory, so Gibson can’t really be knocked.

Dude. Look at that differential number. Manny was on fire from the field, particularly from 3. Of course, most of his attempts came after the game was well in hand, but… dude.

Very good defense, and made a bunch of good plays on offense, despite not shooting very much. I credit him with 7 assists (or unconverted assists). Maybe he wasn’t quite as good as I remembered (his making an offensive play could have shocked me into thinking he was doing very well), because his differential isn’t the greatest, but I’ll take it.

He didn’t do much slashing to the hole (which he’s been very good at of late), but I’ll take this LLP every game, especially considering he made bunch of good drive and kick plays.

OMFG look at that differential. He didn’t get a ton of usage, but playing against taller players every game, you’d expect him to be at a slight disadvantage in terms of differential. He didn’t participate in a single negative shift.

No shots, and a very small sample size prevent me from criticizing Shepherd. I didn’t even get to type “Very good athleticism and very bad basketball skills” in the shot chart once. What a disappointment.

Easily the player of the game. Started out unstoppable, scoring Michigan’s first few buckets. Dominated Cyrus Tate inside.

Nothing truly noteworthy. It’s more his steady presence than anything tangible that Merritt helps being to the team.

Tiny sample size and no shots = no conclusion drawn.

Played few enough minutes that his differential isn’t troubling, especially considering much of his time came when the game was already decided (i.e. after the first 5 minutes)..

OMG he missed a three. YANK HIS SCHOLLIE. uninteresting junk time appearance for Eric.

Jerry’s Final Thoughts
During Football season, Dr. Saturday came up with a method of determining whether Oklahoma was running up the score to pass Texas in the BCS. The general idea was as follows:

1. Figure out how many points losing team scores.
2. Figure out when winning team reaches this score.
3. Determine from game margin and time left whether winning team was running up the score.

Iowa scored 45 points in this game. Michigan reached 45 points (passed it actually, reaching 47 on a 3-pointer from Stu Douglass) with 16:15 left in the game, leading 47-26. So yeah, this was a certified blowout. I don’t believe quite as much in “running up the score” in college basketball as I do in football, especially when the winning team is on the bubble and making its case for the tournament. But still, this was dominating in every way.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Or: Tim’s foray into tempo-free statistics.

Michigan takes on the Iowa Hawkeyes tomorrow at 2:30 PM in Indianapolis. The first-round Big Ten Tourney game is crucial if Michigan wants to return to The Big Dance, and Wolverine fans can catch it on ESPN2.

Tempo-Free and efficiency comparison (if you need an explanation of what any of these things mean, head to KenPom’s website):

Differences of more than 100 places in the rankings garner two-letter advantages, differences of more than 200 get a third.

When Last We Met…

In perhaps the most poorly-officiated game of the year (and that’s saying a TON. Actually, the Minnesota game might have been slightly worse, but the bad calls were distributed evenly between the two teams and didn’t greatly affect the game’s outcome), Michigan had a regulation victory cruelly ripped from their hands by shockingly incompetent officiating, and the Wolverines sealed their own fate in overtime. Manny Harris was benched for the entire extra session, Michigan couldn’t hit a shot (or take any other than contested 3s) and the Wolverines lost by double-digits. Iowa managed to take the game without their bigman, Cyrus Tate.

Since Last We Met…

Michigan has picked up huge wins over Purdue (at home) and Minnesota (on the road), while dropping an away game to Wisconsin in between. Michigan, who looked to be dead in the water after losing to Iowa (again, under questionable circumstances), has played itself back into tourney contention.

Iowa dropped games to Michigan State, Northwestern, and Ohio State before knocking off Penn State in Carver-Hawkeye, and putting a severe dent in the Nittany Lions’ chances of dancing. Cyrus Tate has returned to action, though he certainly isn’t at 100% effectiveness. In what could be the last game of his college career, I presume Tate will give it all he has.

And…?

Though it certainly didn’t feel like it after the big win against Minnesota, Michigan absolutely must come away from this game victorious if they want the tourney dream to remain alive. Cyrus Tate has been back on the court for the Hawkeyes, which should improve them a bunch. However, Iowa is playing for little more than a chance to spoil somebody’s season, whereas Michigan’s motivation is making their first NCAA tournament in 10 years. Beating Illinois in the next game certainly wouldn’t hurt, but a win over Iowa is absolutely crucial.

KenPom doesn’t make predictions for the conference tournaments (primarily because they aren’t listed on the teams’ schedules). To Vegas, Michigan is a single-digit favorite at the neutral site.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Shooting data can be found in .xls format here.

Half 1

Half 2

Individual Players

Stu’s negative differential doesn’t necessarily say anything bad about him, so much as it says a lot about how important LLP’s performance was on this day.

Zack had a very good differential for how little he played, and he was on the floor for a big part of the run late in the second half that allowed Michigan to get back in the game. He wasn’t particularly active in it (except for one big block that caused a shot clock violation on the Gophers), but hey, he was out there.

Played almost the whole game, and shot much better (in terms of decision-making) than he had been.

CJ Lee good DEFENSE, not great OFFENSE. Did a much better job than usual breaking the press, which allowed Beilein to play him over Grady.

Huge. Shot the lights out in the second half when Michigan needed him most. Since I call him out when he’s a liability, I’d better give him props when he plays like this.

Wasn’t on the floor for a few of the negative shifts in the first half, but other than that played the whole game against much bigger opponents.

With such a small sample size, can’t really criticize his negative differential.

The differential number for Sims is surprising, considering he was the game’s leading scorer. He missed the shift in the second half where Michigan really started making the big comeback.

Nothing truly noteworthy. It’s more his steady presence than anything tangible that Merritt helps being to the team.

Got less playing time than last game, and wasn’t a major factor either way.

I saw him catch the ball and not shoot it on FOUR separate occasions. What an improvement! Actually had some very nice plays on defense and offense.

Hooray for big second half comebacks, especially one pulled off with DeShawn Sims on the bench against a team with very good size.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball