//

UFR: Michigan State

Shooting data can be found in .xls format here.

Half 1

1st Half
Lineup Time Score Differential
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Gibson 4:50 4-7 -3
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 3:51 6-2 +4
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Shepherd, Sims :44 0-2 -2
Merritt, Lucas-Perry, Lee, Shepherd, Sims 2:33 3-6 -3
Merritt, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Gibson :46 0-2 -2
Grady, Lee, Harris, Novak, Gibson 1:23 0-0 0
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Sims 4:05 2-2 0
Grady, Lee, Harris, Novak, Gibson 1:48 0-2 -2
Totals 20:00 15-23 -8

Half 2

2nd Half
Lineup Time Score Differential
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Gibson 2:10 0-2 -2
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 1:42 4-2 +2
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Sims 3:29 7-6 +1
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 2:01 2-3 -1
Grady, Lee, Harris, Novak, Sims 3:52 4-3 +1
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims :11 0-1 -1
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Gibson 1:28 3-2 +1
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Gibson 1:39 3-3 0
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 3:28 4-9 -5
Totals 20:00 27-31 -4

Individual Players

Stu Douglass 17min -4
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane
Midrange
3-pt 0/1 0/1

Didn’t shoot well, but was still productive on both ends of the court.

Zack Gibson 15min -8
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 0/1 1/1
Midrange 0/1
3-pt 1/1

Was only on one positive shift (and even that was just +1).

Manny Harris 37min -9
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 1/1
Midrange 0/1 0/2 0/1
3-pt 1/5 0/1

Has a bad differential, but he also played nearly the entire game in a 12-point loss.

CJ Lee 37min -4
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 1/1
Midrange 0/1
3-pt 0/1 0/1

Has really found a place on this team as a point guard. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have any offensive game, but he’s great on the other end of the court.

Laval Lucas-Perry 16min -7
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 0/1
Midrange 0/1
3-pt 1/2

Continued to struggle.

Zack Novak 37min -7
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 0/1
Midrange
3-pt 2 0/2 1/3

Played admirably against a bigger and more athletic Spartans front line. Alas, he didn’t get any open looks.

Jevohn Shepherd 3min -5
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 1
Midrange
3-pt

Was only on the court during the stretch of death in the first half. He’s an absolute liability on both ends of the court.

DeShawn Sims 25min  -4
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 0/1 5/6 4/4
Midrange
3-pt 0/1 0/2

Very good job by DeShawn. Probably a product of the defense, but he didn’t have a single midrange attempt.

David Merritt 6min -7
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane
Midrange
3-pt

Led the collapse on offense in the middle of the first half.

Kelvin Grady 7min -1
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane
Midrange
3-pt 0/1 0/1

Not bad, but not good enough on defense to prove he deserves more playing time.

It appears as though Beilein has sold out for defensive production (Lee, Merritt) at the expense of offensive production. It’s been successful in keeping games close, but it really allows opponents to go on runs when nobody on the court for Michigan can score. The officiating in this game was complete crap, but I think the Wolverines got the better end of the deal.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Comments Off on UFR: Michigan State

Tags: ,

Preview: South Florida

Image Courtesy
of Bullfanshop.com

South Florida

February 20, 2009
1pm
Jack Russell Stadium
Clearwater, Fla.
Home Team: Michigan
Media:  Audio and Stats (via MGoBlue.com)
Probable Pitchers: TBA vs Chris Fetters (0-0)
Michigan Record vs Opponent: 4-6
Last Series/Game: Split in 2001 (1-1)@ USF

Overview

This Friday, the Michigan Wolverine baseball team will open up the 2009 season with the South Florida Bulls in the Big10/BigEast Challenge, held in Clearwater, FL. South Florida is currently ranked as “another team receiving votes” in several polls, including Collegiate Baseball Newspaper’s Fabulous 40, approximately 67th overall. The ranking places them 2nd in the BigEast, one place ahead of last year’s BigEast Champion St. John’s. The BigEast Coaches have voted USF as the 2nd best team in their preseason poll. With all the experience returning this year, including a solid starting rotation and two potential closers, USF is expected to make a run at the NCAA tournament this season.

Last year’s South Florida team was 31-27 overall (14-13 in BigEast play), which was good enough for a 6 seed in the conference tournament. USF managed to upset 3-seed Notre Dame in the first round of play, but eventually lost to 2 seed Cincinnati, forcing them to the losers’ bracket. In the losers’ bracket, USF beat 7 seed West Virginia, then lost again to Cincinnati again. Last year’s team was one dominated by freshmen and sophomores, many at key starting positions.

The Stars

The biggest returning stars for the USF team are center fielder Ryan Lockwood and super-utility player Stephen Hunt. Lockwood (bats left/throws right) was a Freshman All American (Rivals, Baseball America, Louisville Slugger, National Collegiate Baseball Writer’s Association, and Ping! Baseball) last year, posting a .415 batting average overall (.454 in conference play). The All-BigEast preseason outfielder is currently riding a 30-game hitting streak (cut short due to a season ending broken finger against St. John’s). Lockwood is also a threat on the bases, stealing 12 in 16 attempts. He had been batting in the three hole during most of the season despite his low power numbers. Lockwood is an early candidate for BigEast Player of the Year and, like our very own Chris Fetters, the 2009 Brooks Wallace Award Watch List (pdf of list). Following Lockwood in the order, usually in the fifth hole was Stephen Hunt (bats left/throws left), a 7th round draft pick in 2007. Hunt was the designated hitter in most games he played in. Hunt’s role on the team was much like Zack Putnam of the recent Michigan teams. Hunt, while predominantly the DH, also worked as a setup man and occasional closer for the team; he also played some first base. Hunt batted .331 for the season (.323 in BigEast play) with 3 home runs and 38 runs batted in.

Ryan Lockwood
Ryan Lockwood, Freshman of the Year,
Image from GoUSFBulls.com

The Bulls also feature one of the nations top freshmen this year. Shortstop Sam Mende (bats right/throws right), 40th round pick by the Yankees this year, will likely start, replacing three year starter Addison Maruszak. Mende was a four year All-State player at Clearwater Central Catholic HS in Clearwater, FL. This game will be played just a few miles from where Mende played high school ball. Mende was the team captain from his sophomore to his senior year, leading his team to the state semifinals his sophomore year, and the championship his junior year. Mende was also the hero of the USF “Fall World Series,” a intrasquad scrimmage held during fall practice.

The Returners

USF has five other returning starters on defense. Senior catcher Trey Manz (bats left/throws right) will be the one of the most important contributors to the Bulls team this season. With so many underclassmen pitchers, Manz has put in great effort this offseason to become a better player. Coach Prado gave an internet interview last semester saying, “I am happy that [Trey] Manz gained 20 pounds and is in great shape.” There had some speculation surrounding last year’s commitment from Miami catcher Adriano Neito, who reneged on a commitment to play for the Washington Nationals. Some had expected him to take over the catching duties from Manz this season. From Coach Prado’s interview, it appears Manz continued to push himself to get better in order to seal his spot as starting catcher.

Also returning will be sophomore third (formerly second) basemen Jonathon Koscso (bats right/throws right). Koscso, one of only two players to start every game for the Bulls, was primarily the nine hole hitter, posting a respectable .276 batting average. Two other outfielders also return in senior Mike Consolmango (bats left/throws left) and junior Chris Rey (bats right/throws right). Consolmango is a 4 year starter with a .264 batting average in 141 games. Rey is a second year starter with a .274 batting average and 35 RBIs.

The last returning starter is first/third basemen Brandon Smith (bats left/throws right). Smith missed the end of the season last year (about 1/3 of the season) with a “right arm injury,” but managed to bat for a .288 average with 22 RBIs. USF lacks a true third basemen on their team, so he may be relegated to play third while Hunt plays first.

Hunt’s services as a reliever will be needed less, so he may be used at first more often. If that doesn’t happen, expect Smith to start at first base. In this case, the Bulls may move Koscso to third base, opening room for junior Peter Brotons (bats left/throws right) at second base. Brotons is a junior college transfer with great success at that level on the Dayton State Falcons. Another option would be redshirt freshman Jordy McGillis, who is listed as just an “infielder.” Going into the offseason, the idea was to have true freshman Sean Buckley (bats right/throw right) make starts at first base, but unfortunately, Buckley suffered an injury that warrants the use of a medical redshirt for his freshman year.

Pitching

Pitching is the true strength of the Bulls team, in particular, the rotation. Last year’s rotation was led by then freshman Randy Fontanez (RHP) and Derrick Stultz (RHP). Fontanez had thirteen appearances (all starts), logging 81.1 innings and 58 strikeouts. His five wins was good for a tie for the team lead. The second major starting pitcher returning was Derrick Stultz, who primarily was the Sunday starter for coach Prado. Stutlz was the most consistent pitcher for the Bulls last year, making 10 starts and 2 relief appearances, stretching 64.1 innings. His 3.08 ERA lead the team, while his 53 strikeouts ranked third. Stutlz also boasted South Florida’s only complete game last season against the BigEast Champion St. John’s. We will probably face on of these two pitchers to start. There is a chance we may see Sophomore righthander Matt Stull, who ended the season strong, earning a team tying high of five wins.

Randy Fontanez
Randy Fontanez,
Image from
mnmathletics.com

South Florida also features a decent bullpen. Last year’s closer was then sophomore/now junior Shawn Sanford (RHP) who was 5-5 for the year with 11 saves in 33 appearances (46.2 innings). Sanford has collected quite a few accolades in his time with the Bulls including: drafted in the 43rd round of the 2006 draft, NCBWA Stopper of the Year Watch List in 2007, Roger Clemens Award Preseason Watch List – 2008, Brooks Wallace Award Preseason Watch List – 2008, NCBWA Stopper of the Year Preseason Watch List – 2008, Rivals.com 2008 Preseason All-Conference Team – 2008, and NCBWA Stopper of the Year Midseason Watch List – 2008. Even with this success, Sanford was used as a starter to end the 2008 season. He made 2 starts to end the year, neither was very successful. He has been mentioned by Coach Prado as in the mix for the remaining weekend starter position.

To replace him at closer, Coach Prado plans to use Louisville transfer Andrew Salgueiro (Jr RHP). Salgueiro transferred to USF in 2007 when Coach Prado changed jobs (markedly strange as Louisville made the tournament that year). At Louisville in 2006, Sagueiro pitched 18 innings over 16 appearances, striking out 20. Playing the Valley League this summer, he struck out 28 in 23.2 innings. Something to keep in mind with Sagueiro is despite striking out so many, he also gives up many many runs. His ERA in his year at Louisville was 4.50, this summer it was 4.18. He appears to be a high risk/high reward type of closer, which isn’t uncommon in college. South Florida has several other pitchers capable of filling in during the middle innings, but not many have had great success.

The remaining returners in the bullpen all have ERAs ranging from 4.63 to 10.18. Being early in the year, I don’t expect too many of the starters to go that deep into games. Hopefully Michigan will be able to knock the starters out early and get into the middle relief.

Other Links of Various Relevancy

2009 Bulls Magazine (pdf)
Interview with Coach Prado (The College Baseball Blog)
USF Website Preview (gousfbulls.com)

Obligatory USF picture for no other reason than this blog has lacked tits, don’t ever expect them again:

Posted under Baseball

Michigan @ Northwestern LiveBlog

Getting started right around 3, when the game starts on BTN.

Posted under Basketball

Comments Off on Michigan @ Northwestern LiveBlog

Tags:

Preview: Northwestern II

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

The Wolverines take on Just Northwestern at 3PM Sunday in Evanston. The game can be seen on 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):

Michigan v. Northwestern: National Ranks
Category Michigan Northwestern Advantage
Mich eFG% v. NU eFG% D 164 161
Mich eFG% D v. NU eFG% 165 26 NN
Mich TO% v. NU Def TO% 15 14
Mich Def TO% v. NU TO% 143 33 NN
Mich OReb% v. NU DReb% 257 278 M
Mich DReb% v. NU OReb% 182 331 MM
Mich FTR v. NU Opp FTR 324 147 NN
Mich Opp FTR v. NU FTR 25 284 MMM
Mich AdjO v. NU AdjD 70 79
Mich AdjD v. NU AdjO 80 54 N

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…

The Wolverines took home a 68-59 victory in Crisler Arena that really wasn’t as close as the final score would seem to indicate. Michigan completely owned the boards on both ends (one of the few times they’ve been able to do so this season). More telling was the Wildcats’ shooting, particularly from 3-pt land. They were 10-27, including 4-13 from Craig Moore. DeShawn Sims and Kelvin Grady(!) led the god guys in scoring, and Manny Harris had a relatively quiet game, outside of his game-high 12 rebounds.

Since Last We Met…

Michigan’s ability to shoot the rock has continued to wane. Their ability to rebound it has increased, however, especially on the defensive end. Unsurpisingly, given the nature of their valiant efforts in losses to UConn and Michigan State, they have continued to slide in overall offensive efficiency, while their defensive numbers have gotten much better. Kelvin Grady,th Wolverines’ second-leading scorer the first time around, has been basically benched by John Beilein. The Wildcats have wins against Indiana and Chicago State and a loss to Illinois, which are basically neutral (excepting, of course, the total FAIL of their collapse against the Illini). They have a win against Wisconsin (positive) and a loss against Iowa (very, very negative) in that stretch as well. The Wildcats have gotten better at shooting in the meantime, but have also allowed opponents to shoot much, much better. Northwestern’s overall efficiencies on both ends have gotten worse.

And?…

If Michigan wants to win, they can’t count on Craig Moore to shoot poorly, especially in his own house (whatever the insignificant Northwestern basketball venue is called). They should certainly exploit their advantages in rebounding and overall athleticism. Getting to the line (especially off the offensive glass) should be the name of the game. Two big intangible factors will come into play in this contest: 1) Northwestern’s complete collapse against Illinois (especially with just a couple days’ turnaround), and 2) Michigan’s extended rest period, a situation which has served them well so far this year. Still, Michigan has struggled on the road this year, and though they have plenty of experience against the 1-3-1, Northwestern can beat anybody on any given night. On the other hand, they can also lose to anybody. Sound familiar?

Posted under Basketball

Comments Off on Preview: Northwestern II

Tags: ,

UFR: UConn

Shooting data can be found in .xls format here.

Half 1

1st Half
Lineup Time Score Differential
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Gibson 4:00 8-12 -4
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Sims 2:16 2-0 +2
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Shepherd, Sims 1:56 4-2 +2
Merritt, Douglass, Novak, Shepherd, Sims 1:09 0-1 -1
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Shepherd, Sims 2:18 3-3 0
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Wright, Gibson :36 3-0 +3
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Wright, Gibson 6:04 11-10 +1
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Wright, Puls 1:41 3-5 -2
Totals 20:00 34-33 +1

Half 2

2nd Half
Lineup Time Score Differential
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Gibson 2:01 0-2 -2
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Gibson :09 0-0 0
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 4:08 9-4 +5
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Shepherd, Sims 1:24 0-4 -4
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Wright, Sims :48 0-4 -4
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 1:06 2-1 +1
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 1:52 2-5 -3
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Shepherd, Gibson :37 0-2 -2
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Gibson, Sims 2:15 6-2 +4
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Gibson, Sims 5:08 8-9 -1
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Wright :01 0-0 0
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims :31 0-3 -3
Totals 20:00 25-36 -9

Individual Players

Stu Douglass 32 min -5
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 0/1
Midrange 1/1
3-pt 0/2 3/3 3/3

Easily the player of the game. Was ice cold (in a good way) from 3.

Zack Gibson 20min -1
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 1/1 1/1
Midrange 1
3-pt 0/1 0/1

Didn’t score a lot, but did some very good work on both sides of the ball.

Manny Harris 39min -9
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 0/3 1/1 1/2
Midrange 1/3
3-pt 1/4 0/1

Kind of a rough day matching up against some really athletic defenders. Limited his turnover a bit, though he’s still committing too many.

CJ Lee 9min +1
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane
Midrange
3-pt 0/1 0/1

Doesn’t do a lot of scoring, but his defensive effort and steady work at point(!) were a huge part of Michigan staying in this game. Forced several turnovers.

Laval Lucas-Perry 8min -4
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 0/1
Midrange
3-pt 0/2

Continued to struggle. Really would be well-served by sitting out a game, I think.

Zack Novak 17min -5
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 1 1/1 1/1
Midrange
3-pt 0/3 0/1 0/1

Not Zack’s best work, and he was in foul trouble for most of the game. I guess that’s to be expected when you’re playing the 4 at 6-5 against one of the bigger teams on the schedule.

Jevohn Shepherd 5min -7
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 1
Midrange
3-pt

Seemed to be a non-factor, but he may have ctually been worse than I remembered. The plus/minus doesn’t even include a couple times he was pulled after committing a foul.

DeShawn Sims 25min  -2
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane 0/1 2/3 2/2 0/1
Midrange 1
3-pt 0/3 0/1

Dude killed it, considering he was matched up against Thabeet and various other trees.

Anthony Wright 9min -2
Quality 0 1 2 3 F
Lane
Midrange
3-pt 1/1

Hit a meaningful shot, and didn’t really screw anything up. That’s a pretty good performance for him.

Other: Puls 2min -2

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Comments Off on UFR: UConn

Tags: ,

Michigan vs. Michigan State Live Blog

If Michigan wins this, they have a good chance of going .500 in conference and making the tourney. If MSU wins, they have the inside track for the regular season championship. A lot to play for. There will probably be a ton of people trying to contribute, so apologies in advanced if your comments don’t get through.

We’ll get started a bit before 7pm.

Posted under Basketball

Comments Off on Michigan vs. Michigan State Live Blog

Tags:

UFR: Penn State

Since I didn’t have the opportunity to record the game and score the shots, this edition of UFR will only include the differential.

Penn State Half 1

1st half differential
Lineup Time on Floor Score Differential
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Gibson 7:46 13-12 +1
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims :23 1-0 +1
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Shepherd, Sims 2:33 5-6 -1
Merritt, Douglass, Lee, Shepherd, Sims 3:17 5-4 +1
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Sims 4:26 2-4 -2
Douglass, Lucas-Perry, Lee, Shepherd, Sims 1:35 3-5 -2
Total 20:00 29-31 -2

Half 2

2nd Half Differential
Lineup Time on Floor Score Differential
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Gibson 3:13 1-3 -2
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 3:03 8-3 +5
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Shepherd, Sims 3:36 7-1 +6
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 2:46 6-2 +4
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Gibson 1:50 5-2 +3
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Gibson :12 0-1 -1
Grady, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Gibson :19 2-0 +2
Grady, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 1:27 3-2 +1
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 1:31 5-2 +3
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 1:06 2-2 0
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Wright, Shepherd, Puls :57 3-3 0
Totals 20:00 42-20 +22

Penn State Totals

Lineup Totals
Lineup Time on Floor Score Differential
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Gibson 10:59 14-15 -1
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Harris, Novak, Sims 4:26 2-4 -2
Merritt, Douglass, Lee, Shepherd, Sims 3:17 5-4 +1
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Shepherd, Sims 6:09 12-7 +5
Douglass, Lucas-Perry, Lee, Shepherd, Sims 1:35 3-5 -2
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 1:54 6-2 +4
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 6:55 16-7 +9
Lee, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Gibson 1:50 5-2 +3
Merritt, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Gibson :12 0-1 -1
Grady, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Gibson :19 2-0 +2
Grady, Douglass, Harris, Novak, Sims 1:27 3-2 +1
Lee, Lucas-Perry, Wright, Shepherd, Puls :57 3-3 0
Total 40:00 71-51 +20

Individual players:

Gibson 13min +3
Novak 27 min +15
Lee 29min +8
Harris 34min +20
Lucas-Perry 18min -5
Douglass 24min +22
Wright 1min 0
Merritt 13 min +9
Shepherd 13min +4
Puls 1min 0
Sims 26min +16
Grady 1min +2

LLP’s struggles continue. In a 20-point blowout, he was the only Michigan player in the negative. Douglass was a true G in this game.

The Michigan Athletic Department didn’t find the UConn game worthy of being immortalized in a boxscore, so I’ll give that game the full UFR treatment sometime in the next few days when I get a chance to re-watch it.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Comments Off on UFR: Penn State

Tags: ,

Preview: Michigan State

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

Michigan takes on the Spartans at 7PM tonight on ESPN. The game takes place in a sold-out Crisler Arena.

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

Michigan v. Michigan State: National Ranks
Category Michigan State Advantage
Mich eFG% v. MSU eFG% D 153 131 S
Mich eFG% D v. MSU eFG% 177 79 S
Mich TO% v. MSU Def TO% 15 201 MM
Mich Def TO% v. MSU TO% 137 154 M
Mich OReb% v. MSU DReb% 258 7 SSS
Mich DReb% v. MSU OReb% 182 4 SS
Mich FTR v. MSU Opp FTR 319 124 SS
Mich Opp FTR v. MSU FTR 23 58 M
Mich AdjO v. MSU AdjD 54 27 S
Mich AdjD v. MSU AdjO 91 9 S

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

As has been the case for much of the past decade, Michigan State is simply a better team than Michigan. They have many of the characteristics of classic Tom Izzo-coached teams: they rebound well, they get to the line decently well, and they do everything else just well enough to win the vast majority of their games. Since Michigan’s slide began against Wisconsin, the Wolverines have fallen off in nearly every category. However, they look to have turned it around (at least a bit) over the past two games. The keys for each team will be hitting their shots and not turning the ball over. Michigan has disadvantages in the first category and advantages in the second on each end of the floor. KenPom predicts a 71-67 Spartans win in a 65-possession game.

The Spartans are led by sophomore Kalin Lucas, who has been very efficient in both dishing it to his teammates and not turning the ball over. Another important piece for the Spartans, however, is Raymar Morgan. The junior power forward has missed the last two games, andisn’t expected to play tonight. If he’s missing, that could help decrease Michigan State’s size/rebounding advantage, if only slightly. Chris Alen is the team’s designated sniper, but he’s been struggling from 3 a bit of late. Will he be able to turn it back on against the hated rival?

For as much better a record as Michigan State owns, I’m surprised the Spartans’ tempo-free profile is this close to Michigan’s. MSU is one of the few teams that hasn’t had AT LEAST 3-letter differentials in rebounding on both ends of the floor, and they are certainly one of the closest teams to Michigan in terms of getting to the line. However, I still think the Spartans are too good for Michigan, and the lone game in this rivalry goes MSU’s way in 2009.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Comments Off on Preview: Michigan State

Tags: ,

Michigan v. UConn Live Blog

We’ll get started a bit before 6pm.

Here’s to keeping it respectable!

Posted under Basketball

Preview: UConn

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

Michigan takes on UConn at 6PM tonight on ESPN. The game takes place on the Huskies’ home floor in Storrs.

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

Michigan v. Connecticut: National Ranks
Category Michigan UConn Advantage
Mich eFG% v. UConn eFG% D 149 6 CC
Mich eFG% D v. Uconn eFG% 180 44 CC
Mich TO% v. Uconn Def TO% 18 312 MMM
Mich Def TO% v. UConn TO% 158 29 CC
Mich OReb% v. UConn DReb% 251 61 CC
Mich DReb% v. UConn OReb% 146 13 CC
Mich FTR v. UConn Opp FTR 318 1 CCCC
Mich Opp FTR v. UConn FTR 17 4 C
Mich AdjO v. UConn AdjD 61 6 C
Mich AdjD v. UConn AdjO 97 5 C

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

I’ll keep this brief, since Michigan is going to get beaten down by the #1 team in the country. 1 fact of note: Michigan’s team profile improved in every single respect following the Penn State game except for offensive rebounding. They still have huge deficits to UConn in most of the Four Factors, though the discrepancies in overall offensive and defensive efficiency really aren’t all that bad.

KenPom predicts a 77-59 Huskies win, and I think it’ll be a little closer, but still something of a blowout.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball