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.

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

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

The shooting data can be found in .xls format here, and the differential data can be found in the multi-game UFR post from earlier this week.

Individual Players

Made a couple gritty white guy plays (normally the domain of Novak), but didn’t shoot well against the Badgers’ suffocating perimeter defense.

Actually played very well. Against a Wisconsin team with lots of tall white guys, I wish he would have gotten more run.

Has a really tough time when the officiating tends to let them play. Of course, that was the standard on one end of the floor for most of the game.

Actually a very good day, considering the only “1” was when Manny screwed him over in a low-clock situation. The differential is also quite good for a 5-point loss.

Didn’t get a ton of minutes, but shot a little better than we’ve come to expect (sad that “better than expected” has become 50% on open 3s).

Didn’t step up as the big third guy, but played admirably against players much taller than he is.

DNP – coach’s decision.

The three-point shooting is bad (though most of them were chucks at the end), and the 1/4 from midrange on makeable shots is uncharacteristic, but think how much more effective Sims could have been with a legit bigman by his side.

Limited playing time, limited effectiveness.

Hardly played at all.

From the differentials, it would appear that point guard play by anyone not named “CJ Lee” was an issue in this game. I’d say this was the case, though I think Grady needs to get minutes in order to be effective as anything other than a press-breaker or spot-up shooter. The Wisconsin defense was pretty good throughout the game, and Michigan’s lack of size really hurt. It’s easy to see how this team will improve next year.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Boy, it sure is easier finishing one of these coming off a big win (Minnesota) and UFRing a big win (Purdue, obviously), than doing one of a heartbreaking loss (Iowa) while anticipating a make-or-break game. The shooting data can be founf in .xls format here, and the differential data can be found in the multi-game UFR post from earlier this week.

Individual Players

Didn’t take a lot of shots (few players outside of Manny and DeShawn did), but did a decent job with the chances he did get.

Only played a couple minutes because DeShawn Sims was amazing. His differential is awful for playing on a team that won by 9 points.

These numbers don’t look as good as Manny actually was.  A couple of those ‘1’s from the lane weren;t his fault (i.e. a tip-in attempt and an uncalled foul).

Didn’t get as much playing time as he’s gotten accustomed to. It’s worth noting that CJ also missed several free throws in the game (he finished 1-4), including the front ends of two separate 1-and-1s.

Didnt get much run, but showed off his ability to get into the lane at times in the first half. I still think he should be used on the dribble more often. He also had a couple assists off drives as well. If he’s used as a scoring threat, rather than just a shooting threat, it will open up the offense for the stars and the freshman sharpshooters.

For as much playing time as he got, Novak wasn’t used very much on offense. He still did the little things defensively (particularly in rebounding), which is commendable because Purdue has some pretty good size. Still, I wish it wasn’t all boom-or-bust with Zack and Douglass.

A fair amount of playing time against a big Purdue team, and he even got on the court at the same time as Novak in a couple instances. He still shows off his athleticism and lack of actual basketball skill simaultaneously.

Easily the star of the game, especially considering Purdue’s marked size advantage. I’ll let the scoreboard speak for itself.

Got pretty good playing time, and didn’t need to shoot too much. 2 Assists, 0 turnovers, and 1 steal sounds good to me.

Clearly the best ballhandling option, but he’s not nearly the defender of someone like Lee, and he’s lost at times in the offense.

And?

Good performance. Anyone questioning whether the stars of this team were DeShawn Sims and Manny Harris (nobody?) certainly had their uncertainties answered in this game. The big two did most of the work, and let the role players just fill in when necessary.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

The shooting data can be founf in .xls format here, and the differential data can be found in the multi-game UFR post from earlier this week.

Individual Players

Not a bad shooting game, but holy hell look at that terrible differential number.

Didn’t get very much run at all. Had 1 legit and 1 crap moving screen go against him in the first half, and I think the foul trouble and the shaken confidence it gave him combined to keep him from playing too much.

His shooting wasn’t particularly bad, especially considering many of those misses in the paint should have been called fouls, but he made some really bad decisions. Way too many “1”s.

grumble grumble running set plays for CJ to shoot 3s grumble grumble. Also, the shifts in which he didn’t play were ALL positive except for one.

Had a pretty good differential, but missed a few shots that he had absolutely no business missing. I’m coming to realize that he should be utilized more as a slasher in addition to a shooter (a role in which he’s recently struggled). And no, I’m not kidding.

Man, if this guy could just shoot as well every game as he did against Minnesota.

Surprisingly, he was one of the few people not in on a negative shift. Of course, that is largely because he barely played at al..

Was a victim of the poor officiating (though not nearly as much as Manny), but other than that, had a lackluster day.

grumble don’t shoot grumble. Played decently enough.

DNP – coach’s decision.

On the Officiating

After people’s reactions in the comments, I thought I might have been a bit harsh in my criticism of the officiating in this game. Upon further Review, I’m even madder than before. Of course, bad calls went both ways, but Michigan by far got the shorter end of the stick. I don’t want to become a boy who cried wolf, so I’m going to refrain from mntioning officiating in the future unless it’s particularly egregious (as it was in this game), but I stand by my previous comments that this game was one of the most poorly reffed I’ve seen all year – and that’s saying something.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball, Hockey, Misc.

I haven’t had a chance to re-watch and score the data for these three games, but that shouldn’t prevent me from posting the (admittedly late) differential data. When I get a chance to grade the shooting, I’ll post those up as well.

Iowa

Half 1

Half 2

OT

Purdue

Half 1

Half 2

Wisconsin

Half 1

Half 2

Individual differentials will be posted when I get the shooting data up; for now you can add them up yourself if you’re so inclined.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Shooting data can be found in .xls format here.

Half 1

Half 2

Individual Players

A pretty active day on offense. Did a lot of work on the fast break, as well.

Didn’t play too much, but made the most of his offensive opportunities.

Not a great day, but had his moments.

Had a few turnovers late in the game, and didn’t shoot particularly well.

Hardly played at all.

On fire all day.

Didn’t play much, and was pretty much the only guy in negative differential.

DeShawn wasn’t really the featured player on this day. He shot a bunch from midrange, but didn’t make as many of them as he usually would.

Handled the ball well enough to not be a liability.

Stepped up and got some significant playing time for the first time in a while.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Shooting data can be found in .xls format here.

Half 1

Half 2

Overtime

Individual Players

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

Played a lot with Sims in foul trouble. Didn’t score a ton, but did what he needed to do.

Really came on offensively in the second half. Played a solid defensive game, as well.

His inability to handle the rock and (occasionally) to shoot free throw nearly cost Michigan the game, but they probably wouldn’t have been in it without his defense.

Had a few big plays defensively.

Shot kinda poorly, but did the gritty white guy thing.

Offensive liability, and he doesn’t help a ton on the defensive end, either.

Not a big offensive day, and he fouled out on a phantom call. He was big defensively though.

Handled the ball well enough to not be a liability.

Only played when Beilein couldn’t rely on CJ to bring the ball up the court against the press.

Standard day.

The officiating in this game was a special kind of suck. This time, I think the Wolverines got the short end of the stick, and Sims’s 5th foul was an especially egregious call. CJ Lee can’t handle the ball at all, and Kelvin Grady really needs to step up his defense a bunch for the offense to get moving again. Beilein has favoired defense over offense for the past 8+ games, and it’s gotten a few results, but being able to get both halves from one player would be huge.

Posted under Analysis, Basketball

Shooting data can be found in .xls format here.

Half 1

Half 2

Individual Players

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

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

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

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.

Continued to struggle.

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

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.

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

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

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