Ricky Doyle: Up To The Challenge
Ricky Doyle played up to the competition. [Fuller]
While our attention has, for the most part, turned to football in the offseason, a new KenPom feature has me digging back into hoops. On individual player pages, KenPom now displays split stats for performaces against (1) conference opponents, (2) games against top-100 opponents, adjusted for game location, and (3) games against top-50 opponents, with the same home-court adjustment.
This is a very useful tool for parsing out how well players did against better competiton. Michigan's big man situation continues to fascinate me, so I thought it'd be useful to see how last year's troika performed against the best teams on the schedule, especially since the disparity in big man quality tends to be large between bad teams and good teams. While KenPom hasn't yet separated out stats for non-top-100 opponents (consider this a humble suggestion from a mathematically challenged blogger), we can get a baseline by looking at each player's full stat line from last season.
| %Min | %Poss | ORtg | OR% | DR% | TORate | Blk% | FC/40 | FTM-FTA | 2PM-2PA | 3PM-3PA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ricky Doyle | 43.7 | 17.9 | 117.4 | 10.4 | 11.9 | 12.0 | 2.6 | 4.0 | 39-66 (59%) | 72-119 (61%) | 0-0 |
| Max Bielfeldt | 34.2 | 22.3 | 107.2 | 12.4 | 19.5 | 13.7 | 1.9 | 3.8 | 22-32 (69%) | 54-99 (55%) | 8-30 (27%) |
| Mark Donnal | 22.3 | 17.0 | 119.6 | 10.2 | 16.1 | 9.6 | 3.8 | 6.4 | 19-27 (70%) | 25-44 (57%) | 7-19 (37%) |
And now, each player's stats against only top-50 opponents. This covers 13 games from last season; Ricky Doyle and Max Bielfeldt played in all 13, while Mark Donnal participated in 11 of them.
| %Min | %Poss | ORtg | OR% | DR% | TORate | Blk% | FC/40 | FTM-FTA | 2PM-2PA | 3PM-3PA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ricky Doyle | 51.4 | 15.5 | 117.7 | 8.3 | 13.5 | 12.6 | 2.2 | 3.8 | 16-25 (64%) | 33-55 (60%) | 0-0 |
| Max Bielfeldt | 32.7 | 22.9 | 91.8 | 8.7 | 21.9 | 16.7 | 2.1 | 4.6 | 8-11 (73%) | 19-38 (50%) | 3-14 (21%) |
| Mark Donnal | 17.0 | 20.6 | 128.2 | 13.9 | 7.3 | 3.6 | 4.0 | 8.4 | 7-11 (64%) | 12-22 (55%) | 2-6 (33%) |
The above helps clarify why John Beilein was comfortable letting Bielfeldt go despite having the opportunity to bring him back. A few takeaways:
Doyle held strong. Doyle's offensive numbers stayed almost exactly the same against top-50 competition; his shooting held at 60%, he took care of the ball, and he allowed the offense to run through the guards/wings. While his offensive rebounding dipped, he still did pretty well in that regard. Equally as encouraging was his ability to hold up defensively; Doyle's foul rate stayed level and he took on a larger share of rebounding duties against top teams.
Bielfeldt's shortcomings became apparent. Bielfeldt proved effective against mid- and lower-tier teams in large part because he dominated the offensive glass, providing himself with easy putback opportunties. Against top-tier teams, however, his offensive rebounding fell off dramatically, his turnover rate rose, and he didn't have a post game or reliable outside shot to make up for either.
Bielfeldt also resorted to fouling more on defense. He was clearly overmatched on that end against high-level competition and that took him out of games even when he had it going offensively; for example, he had nine points on 4-6 shooting in the home overtime loss to Wisconsin but picked up three fouls in 14 minutes because he couldn't defend Frank Kaminsky or Nigel Hayes.
Donnal showed promise on one end. Donnal's decreased role as the season wore on means his sample size is smaller than the others—he essentially played two games worth of minutes against top-50 teams, and he did so in short stints. Those short stints weren't always by design. Donnal was foul-prone in the best of times but especially against good teams; yes, that 8.4 fouls/40 minutes figure is real and speaks to some major defensive shortcomings that were apparent to anyone who watched him play.
There's hope in the offensive numbers, however. Donnal was... good? Again, the tiny sample size makes it hard to draw grand conclusions here, but his rebounding rate and shooting numbers are encouraging.
----------------
With a bulked-up DJ Wilson—listed at 6'9, 240 on the updated roster—set to bolster depth up front, it makes sense for Beilein to prioritize developing Donnal and Wilson into reliable options instead of giving significant minutes to a redshirt senior whose limitations become very apparent in the most important games. With a year of development under Ricky Doyle's belt and a logjam at the four, Michigan may only need one of those two to play a major role off the bench anyway.
Im fairly suprised Donnal's offensive numbers were held up that strong (i percieved him as fairly bad offensively, let alone Horrible on D). Im equally suprised Biefeldt was that bad. I perceived him as being better offensively than what the statistics show. Matter of fact, i thought overall Biefeldt did MUCH better than Donnal, and the stats do not display that.
Not able to check the numbers, but it seemed like Max had a couple of fairly solid games right at the end of the season and in the BTT. At that same point, Donnal was pretty much out of the rotation, or in foul trouble so quickly that he might as well have been out. Would explain why we think of him as playing better even if the overall numbers don't support that claim.
And that's not necessarily an inaccurate assessment of the situation, either. For instance, we would probably be correct in assuming Dawkins will be more like the guy who was raining threes in conference play going forward than the guy who couldn't get on the court at the start of the season.
(O')Doyle rules
Reactions to the above:
- None of those offensive rebounding rate numbers are good. As a point of reference Jordan Morgan (who was OK, but far from dominant) grabbed 12% on O, as did Horford. McGary was at 16%. Bielfeldt didn't grab enough ORBs to be reliant on that as his means to score.
- The overall point about Bielfeldt being less effective against good teams stands. It is intiuitively, anectodetally, and statistically evident.
- But credit where it's due too. Bielfeldts defensive rebounding was solid and stayed strong regardless of opponent. Despite being undersized he still outrebounded Doyle by a massive margin. That is why Bielfeldt not being asked back was in doubt. Doyle's numbers here are just flat out awful. Horford averaged 24% of DRB while at Michigan, even when he was a shrimp. Morgan was 19%. A Michigan center can not be at 12 or 13%.
- Great that Doyle maintained his offensive effectiveness, but he should to a degree. His shot attempts were mostly layup attempts created by others. Bielfeldt was more perimeter oriented and therefore more affected by opposition talent/length/closing ability. Still, Doyle (presumably) had more shot-blockers to contend with in the top 50, so it's a notable accomplishment that he maintained.
- Some of the above was also Doyle playing within himself relative to earlier in the season. He took far fewer low percentage shots as the season wore on (and the schedule got harder).
- Even though it's 11-13 games we are talking about, there is still a danger in reading too much into this stuff. Look at the variation in FT% for example.
- Would have been a better and more convincing argument if the math had been done for the non top 50 stuff that is easily gettable like FG%.
Personally I think Bielfeldts departure had almost nothing to do with Doyle. They are a sign he is confident in Wilson and Donnal and, in particular - their ability to develop into better rebounders than we saw last year. We'll need all 3 though, because Doyle still isn't going to be up for 30 mpg and all three are still inexperienced and foul prone.
Great to see more quality basketball analysis here. I'm in the minority I think in that I'm still more excited about the upcoming basketball season than football.
By excited do you mean more enthusiastic or more optimistic of success?
Personally I am more optomistic about success on the basketball court, but I am more enthusiastic about seeing an improved football team under Harbaugh. Football has just been so depressing lately the breath of fresh air will be most welcome.
In terms of success however, I am guessing that basketball finishes higher in the B1G standings and national polls than football.
I think basketball is in better place than football through the next 5 years.
My long-term enthusiasm and expectations for the basketball team are sky high. I think Beilein's built this into a top 10 program and that with slightly more recruiting success we will be a perrenial sweet 16 team and contending for conference titles every year, which is all you can really ask. I think Teske is going to be an impact guy for this program and Beilein's ability to find guards and wings is well proven. I'll admit that my hopes dimmed a bit by the Battle fiasco but that's just one guy.
Furthermore, it doesn't affect the short-term, where I see us as a top 3 team in the Big 10 and a fringe top 10 team overall. The key to that is the center position because I think the perimeter players are going to be all the things we said about them a year ago, and not the stuff we saw in November and December.
The biggest downer about bball is that Beilein is getting old and so the end is on the horizon...and of course the frustrations of recruiting these 3 most recent classes haven't quite been overcome yet.
In football I have high hopes, but there is a more uphill battle and multi-year struggle to reach Top 10 status. The systematic difficulties are numerous here. These are difficulties that you don't have to deal with in basketball: the immediate presence of an indivision national powerhouse (OSU), the geography putting most elite prospects outside of the region, the struggles of the last 10 years, and Harbaugh's personality turning people off. Basketball has Duke and Kentucky and Kansas with a significant talent advantage, but those schools are in different conferences, and there is no talent equivalent to the south in football. In football it's entire conferences that have a talent advantage and OSU's hold on Ohio is only strengthening.
I love Harbaugh though, and do think we can turn the tide. It's just we have to do it from the position of an underdog (unlike bball).As for next year -- I think there's an excellent chance Michigan gets to 8 or 9 wins. With only 1 game where we'll be heavy underdogs there's a chance we reach 10 or 11 even. If that happens it's on because the recruits will follow immediately (unlike in basketball). But more realistically we are not an elite team yet and it will take a few years to get there.
In terms of enthusiasm related to watchability, I would say that Beilein and his kids are extremely likeable and the style of play is offensive-oriented and just flat out fun to watch. Harbaugh is different, and the style of play will only be as enjoyable as the results it produces.
For me, it's the complete opposite. Harbaugh is already recruiting at a high level and he hasn't even coached a game yet. Football has some positive momentum, whereas I see the opposite for basketball. They can't land any difference makers in recruiting, recently losing battles to Cal (WTF) and a sanctioned Syracuse program. It just seems like the shine of our NCG appearance has worn off and we were unable to use that as a launching point into perennial elite status.
Football is at a disadvantage because success is defined to a large degree by beating two rivals (who happen to be very good). Basketball doesn't need to be better than MSU or OSU, or Wisconsin or Indiana for that matter. No one remembers that the 2013 team had all kinds of trouble with those teams—all that matters is they did well enough in the regular season, then made a great run in the tournament.
If you look at it strictly from the standpoint of which program is likelier to produce a strong team, the answer is football. Essentially, you now have two coaches who are great at player development, but only one of them runs a program that can win recruiting battles (even at its nadir).
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Bball fans absolutely do care about beating MSU, but there is no equivalent to Ohio State in football. You are right that the post-season matters more in bball (we care more about a tourney run than a bowl game) and the regular season less.
Why is the football program more likely to produce a strong team? If your argument is recruiting -- I disagree. I think Michigan football has a harder road to recruiting elite players than basketball for the reasons mentioned above. OSU doesn't 'own' the best players in the midwest. Neither does Kentucky. Everyone recruits nationally and the elite talent is spread out all over the country. You have bagmen in both sports.
Michigan landed top 15 classes in consecutive years. Can't land difference makers? Buddy you haven't been paying attention.
Bball is inherently more volatile, but they've been inches away from landing elite top 75 players, even top 25 players in both the '15 and '16 classes.
As for football, Michigan always gets a bump in the rankings, but ultimately is going to be in that 5-15 range in good years too, because we aren't outrecruiting OSU, Alabama, Georgia anymore than we're outrecruiting Duke, Kansas, Kentucky.
The biggest difference is that in 'bad' years Michigan will still be in the 15-30 range in football, while basketball falls off the map. Again, that's the nature of have 80-some scholarships vs some-teen scholarships.
Both programs are taking flyers on 3-star talents. If you break down percent of the roster that is 3 star, 4 star, 5 star -- would it be much different?
I cant wait for Doyle in the up coming seasons. He really impressed me as a true freshman. I think he actually played better than Mcgary in the regular season. Mcgary did explode in tourny and we all know Doyle didnt get the chance. That said, Im really excited for Michigan bball this season!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I don't think anybody expects Doyle to be as good as McGary.
Biefeldt is gone because if he is getting more than 5 minutes a game we are not beating good teams. It is that simple. The bar is set higher than what he can provide.
my neighbor's mother-in-law makes $98 /hour on the computer . She has been without a job for five months but last month her payment was $18744 just working on the computer for a few hours. see page
Comments