Today: Twitter questions. Tomorrow: your emails (and it's not too late to send those in).

So on a scale of meh to OH DEAR GOD, how much does Michigan miss Livers?

More specifically, what do you think is the most underrated aspect of what Michigan misses about him in his absence?

— Hoover Street Rag (@hooverstreet) January 14, 2020

I went to Hoops Lens and their on/off numbers to confirm, and while it may not quite be an all-caps situation... oh dear god:

guarantee games removed

As the numbers indicate, Michigan misses Livers even more on defense than they do on offense—and they miss him quite a bit on offense. While you can usually chalk up an 11+ percentage-point drop in three-point shooting to a lot of bad luck, it's less easy to argue that when replacing a shot-maker of Livers's caliber with a hesitant shooter like Brandon Johns. Some of that drop is Eli Brooks hitting a major shooting slump that's largely independent of Livers's absence; a lot of it is losing the team's best outside shooter and not having a reliable replacement in that regard.

But while Michigan has shown the ability—if they can shoot straight—to somewhat approximate their full-strength offensive effectiveness without Livers, the same cannot be said about their defense. The gap in two-point defense is a hair under ten percentage points, a massive difference. The Wolverines also rebound significantly better and foul far less often when Livers is on the floor.

Livers is the only wing defender on the team who can switch two through four without getting burned, and he can even guard point guards and centers in certain situations. Michigan didn't lose to Minnesota only because they couldn't stop Daniel Oturu in the post; when they tried to inject some offense by playing Franz Wagner at the four in the second half, he was the primary culprit in allowing 6'9", 235-pound senior Alihan Demir, not normally a major scoring threat, to pour in 13 second-half points. Wagner wasn't strong enough to keep Demir out of the paint; that wouldn't have been the case with Livers.

The shooting Livers provides gives Michigan's offense a major boost. His defensive ability and versatility, however, is what unlocks the lineup combinations that currently make the difference between an excellent defense and a bad one.

[Hit THE JUMP for a lot of questions about the centers and defensive strategy, plus keeping an eye on the future.]

In your opinion, are the post defense issues related more to scheme or personnel? Or both? #mgomailbag

— Pat Suyak (@psuyak) January 14, 2020

I don't believe Jon Teske forgot how to play post defense in the last month. While I don't think he's blameless, the one-on-one approach has left him batting solo against some really skilled centers that have rarely even had to fight off a rake at the ball on the catch. You can get away with that sometimes; you can't get away with it all the time, at least not on this level. This is primarily a scheme issue.

There are also issues with both role and personnel. Teske is an integral part of Michigan's offense, taking just under 25% of the team's shots when he's on the floor. He's working very hard on that end on most possessions, whether it's playing his half of the screen-and-roll game, working high-low sets, or posting up. It's extremely difficult to do all that and bang in the post against a high-level post scorer seemingly every game or two.

Teske has some conditioning limitations—namely, he's 7'1", 265 pounds—and is being asked to do more than ever. His backups are limited in one way or another to the point that Juwan Howard is probably inclined to leave Teske out there until he's gassed against tough opponents, or at least try to match his minutes against the other starter.

We'll see how Howard adjusts on Friday, when Teske faces Luka Garza, who scored 44 points in the first matchup, a 12-point Michigan win at Crisler. Iowa has since lost Jordan Bohannon, which should allow more opportunities to double off potential shooters.

Colin Castleton needs some coachin' up. Also some bulkin' up. [Campredon]

Is Castleton's recent absence more about defensive matchups against burlier bigs, a lack of development on offense, or something Austin Davis is doing better?

If you had to guess, is next year's starting center currently on the roster?

— Alex Garbarino (@DrGarbs) January 14, 2020

Starting with the first question: a combination of the three. I'm going to start with this: big men take time to develop, some take leaps at earlier points than others, and I wouldn't get too down on Castleton based on any of this—we knew when he got to campus that he was going to take time to be playable in the Big Ten and he's still quite skinny.

The lack of strength ends up hurting him on both ends. Against low-level competition, he's been a productive offensive player with some nifty post finishing and good offensive rebounding; when the opposing big men are bigger, stronger, and better, Castleton's numbers nosedive into unplayable territory. On defense, he doesn't have the bulk to hold up on the post, and his rebounding instincts aren't nearly good enough to cover for that yet. 

Davis doesn't have Castleton's potential, but he can finish through contact, hit the offensive glass, and provide some defensive resistance by denying post position and walling up. He's holding the fort when he's in the game, which is generally all you can ask of a college backup center. As it turns out, his surprising fourth-year leap has been much-needed.

As for next year, it's a tough call. Castleton will have the advantage of experience; if he has a good year of physical development, the tools are in place for him to be a quality starting big man. That said, Castleton wasn't handpicked by Juwan Howard, and given Hunter Dickinson is already in the 7'1", 260-pound range and quite talented himself, the usual advantages for an upperclassman going up against a freshman may be mitigated.

Gun to my head—rude, by the way—I'm going with Castleton. As with most center combinations, however, there should be a relatively even split in minutes, and Howard will also have some smaller lineup combinations to consider with Johns looking viable as a situational center.

Do you think with the recruiting class coming in, we will be able to win with the defensive strategy we have been using? Is it just a matter of talent?

— jb (@jdboyd4) January 15, 2020

I'm not sure it matters, to be honest. A few things that are important to keep in mind:

• Howard is in his first year as a head coach at any level, and he hasn't been around the college game for a full season since he wore a Michigan uniform. He's still acclimating to the differences between utilizing NBA-caliber players and Big Ten-caliber players (or NBA-caliber players in an earlier stage of development).
• The short turnaround between Purdue and Minnesota meant we were less likely to see major changes in defensive approach. Iowa will be more telling. We've seen Howard adjust his preferred pick-and-roll coverage based on the situation; he hasn't come off as particularly inflexible outside of the post defense philosophy and we could see that change this week.
• We haven't seen Howard's approach when he has his ideal personnel. Right now, he's probably doing some combination of what he wants and what he's being forced to do with John Beilein's players.

That said, I do believe the players Howard is recruiting will be better-suited to Howard's so-far-extreme no help approach. Simply put, he's recruiting bigger, more athletic players. Whether Howard is married to this defensive scheme is yet to be seen; I have little doubt the defense will get better when he has his guys in place, especially with the way he's been recruiting.

If Michigan keeps everyone currently committed (Todd, Dickinson, Zeb, Williams), brings on Josh Christopher, and keeps Livers, should they be the favorite to win the national championship next year?

— Manuel Excel (@colintj) January 14, 2020

Kentucky has four composite five-stars committed (plus two four-stars) while Duke has three five-stars and three four-stars. Gonzaga has a five-star in their class while still being Gonzaga, a program that consistently plays above their (industry-perceived) talent level, and depending on NBA draft declarations they could be loaded for a run. It's hard to pick Michigan as the outright favorite, particularly since their current five-star commit—Isaiah Todd—is more of a "this guy could develop into a monster at the end of his first NBA contract" five-star than a "this guy is going to destroy college basketball" five-star.

If the Wolverines get Christopher and retain Livers, though? As we've mentioned around here, it's hard to even figure out how to distribute minutes. You figure out a rotation with:

• DeJulius, Brooks, and Zeb Jackson as point/combo guards
• Christopher—who's capable of playing lead guard himself—along with Livers, Wagner, Bajema, and Williams as wings/forwards.
• Castleton, Dickinson, Todd, and Johns in the frontcourt.

Michigan isn't going to have a 12-man rotation but cutting it down to a tighter group gets tough in a hurry. If certain players don't develop as hoped, there are other options, and those options are talented. Expecting a team with that combination of experience, talent, and lineup flexibility to be in the Final Four mix is reasonable.